User talk:Maethoredhel
|
|
Welcome to my Talk page! —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log)
Welcome!
|
Kim Kwang-jin
Hi Maethoredhel
You reverted[1] my edit[2] to Kim Kwang-jin only 1 minute after I made it.
I created[3] the new category 1 minute later, so I have restored my version.
I see that you are a new editor, so welcome. But please, don't pounce on other editor's work-in-progress. That doesn't help anyone. (I have been editing for 10 years, so I do have some idea what I am doing, or I'd have been blocked or banned somewhere in the course of my ~580,00 edits!).
Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: My apologies, I am a recent changes patroller, and a ORES user, which generally makes me more prone to mistakes. I apologize once again, and thank you for notifying me. —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log) 18:33, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Maethoredhel. But may I suggest that doing recent changes patrolling is not a wise choice of task for a new editor? It's a job which benefits a lot from more experience of how en.wp works.
- If the tool you are using makes your more prone to mistakes, that's another good reason to direct your energies to another aspect of Wikipedia. Making mistakes with other editors work-in-progress can seriously annoy some of those editors, and it'd be a pity for your start to turn sour.
- Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:43, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: I thank you for your suggestions; however, I have had previous experience with editing wiki(s), including Wikipedia. If others have a problem with an edit of mine, that is a separate discussion that they may undertake with me. Generally though, I avoid disturbing my fellow editors while patrolling recent changes, as I assume good faith and let it pass. Nevertheless, the aforementioned tool does occasionally incorrectly highlight a good edit, such as is the case here, and therefore I assume full responsibility for my action(s). —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log) 19:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Placeholder?
Hi Maethoredhel. Why would you create User talk:Prahlad balaji/resloaosdjgodspaojuipzLOjibvcLZasldv,lkvcxs;.dn, bvcmkbcVXcm ,v./m, .z,./zxm,./zAk.css and the send it to AfD (wrong venue anyway)? — Sam Sailor 00:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor: That was an unintended side effect of attempting to warn the creator of the page that it violated WP:Article titles. I apologize and take responsibility for this, and in addition you cannot add {{delete}} to user .css or .js pages (to my knowledge). Therefore, I usually create the talk page and add the delete template there. I apologize once again. My actions were done with WP:TW, and may I ask what can be done to resolve the situation? Additionally, I assumed that MfD was the proper venue, but Twinkle messed up on me and threw in a red link, which caused the re-categorization (into AfD, which is incorrect as you stated). —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log) 00:50, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- I put a
{{Db-g6|rationale=Made by mistake, see creator's talk page}}on them, and removed the entry from the AfD log. Don't worry about it, mistakes happen here. :) — Sam Sailor 01:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)- @Sam Sailor: Thank you very much! ☺ —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log) 01:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- Just thought I'd follow up and say that WP:Article titles applies to main namespace, but not to user space. In general we give each other a lot of leeway in regards to what we do in "our own" user space, the details are found in WP:UP, and if a user has been active in the last 12 months, we normally discuss it with them before nominating one of their subpages for deletion. Some exemptions are listed at WP:FAKEARTICLE; notice, if ever you think of using {{Db-u5}} that WP:U5 has the caveat: "where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages". The user in question here seems to have been doing a lot of script testing. I left him a message and suggested he take a look at Test.Wikipedia. — Sam Sailor 02:47, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor: Thank you very much! ☺ —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log) 01:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- I put a
@Sam Sailor: Thank you once again, and I should probably read more of the Wikipedia policy concerning user pages before taking any form of action in the future. —Maethoredhel (Talk • Contribs • Log) 15:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
March 2017 WikiCup newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:
Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.
The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.
So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
May 2017 WikiCup newsletter
The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:
- Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
- 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
- Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
- Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.
Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.
So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
WikiCup 2017 July newsletter
The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.
Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
WikiCup 2017 September newsletter
Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Gold currency for a wiki.png
Thank you for uploading File:Gold currency for a wiki.png. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ~ Rob13Talk 22:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
