This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.
WikiCup 2012 February newsletter
Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was Grapple X (
submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was Tigerboy1966 (
submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were Ruby2010 (
submissions), Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), Miyagawa (
submissions) and Casliber (
submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list:
List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Ruby2010 (
submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.
The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.
The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn (
talk •
email) and
The ed17 (
talk •
email) 00:02, 1 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Wacht am Rhein
As you'll recall, the FPC got a little bogged down. I'd like it to pass a second time, so I was wondering if you think that launching
File:Wacht am Rhein map (Edit 3).svg alone is appropriate. It would depend, for example, on whether you accept my viewpoint on the arrows. If you think that edit3 is the best (or 4, I have no opinion), then I don't know whether you have to nominate or conominate, or something. I plan to tweak it (minorly) following a suggestion on my talk page. Grandiose(
me,
talk,
contribs) 11:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Hi. Yes, unfortunately the FPC got a little derailed and I can't help but feel that was in the most part my fault for adding so many ALTs and confusing !voters. I totally accept your viewpoint on the arrows. As I later said in the nomination, I hadn't considered that having the arrows at different widths and sizes gave the impression that some attacks were larger than others when in fact they just covered a greater distance.
I hope that with you not having a preference doesn't mean that I somehow caused you to become disconnected with the map. My intentions were just to improve on your work by tweaking things to Wikipeida's map style. My preference is for
edit 4 with the slightly opaqued topography. You're right that it improves readability, because the elevations are not the main thing going on here and we want to see the lines and arrows without too much interference, but at the same time we can still see that it took place over raised terrain.
I saw the bit that User:Udisblizbadjoke wsa talking about.
His image looks like there's a couple of arrows missing in this one. It's probably better if you just add them to the file that's already uploaded and upload over it rather than create yet another entirely new file page, especially since it doesn't seem like it's a major change. Feel free to nominate whenever you're ready. There's no need to conominate but if you're feeling particularly generous a nod as co-creator would help me in my
WP:CUP endeavour! Matthewedwards :
Chat 03:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
OK, I think I've made the necessary changes to
File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg. Good to go, do you think? I certainly hope so. (Oh, and I certainly think you should get points if it passes. We'll see what they think.) Grandiose(
me,
talk,
contribs) 12:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Something went wrong, it looks like you uploaded the original again... Matthewedwards :
Chat 13:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
I'm sorry I don't know what you mean.
This was your version, and then I made two smal adjustments:
here and
here. Those seem to only have done what I intended. (Oh, and thanks for the tidying up of the articles also.) Thanks, Grandiose(
me,
talk,
contribs) 20:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
NP. I can see the differences now, but I had to clear my cache for some reason. The first and third looked the same at first. Matthewedwards :
Chat 21:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
The
WikiProject Film Newsletter Volume VII, no. 1 - January–February
Project news
The current ongoing drive at WikiProject Film is the improvement of the Stub-Class articles from the
Core article list. The aim is to improve these articles to Start-Class or better. The drive began with the 2011 update of the list, at which time 106 Stub-class articles remained—this is now down to 86.
The Category:Film articles needing an image is quite large at 3,704 articles! You can help by even just adding one image a day to start working the list down. Information on finding and uploading images can be found on the
infobox template page
Remember that any editor can give the
WikiProject Film Award to another WP:Films member. If you do present this award, please make mention of it here or tell one of the newsletter editors who will then include it in the next issue.
Please add your name to the member list if you have not already.
... that Spanish character actor José Manuel Martín starred in one of the earliest
Spaghetti Westerns, Savage Guns (1961), and went on to become one of the most prolific villains of the genre?
... that English filmmaker Greta Schiller directed the 1976 short film Greta's Girls which is one of the first documentaries that focuses on
lesbians?
From the editors
If you've just joined, add your name to the
Participants section of
Wikipedia:WikiProject Film. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered
as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!
Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the
next issue (Issue 2 – March). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
Users are always welcome to help us with this newsletter. If you are interested, please leave a message on an existing editor's talkpage or sign up on the "Contributors" list of the
central newsletter page, and we will tell you everything you need to know and answer your questions.
Vettel had started the race in
pole position alongside Button, whom he had marginally outqualified. The two drivers were the only two within mathematical contention for the title. Button attempted to overtake Vettel at the start of the race, yet was pressured towards the grass by Vettel which resulted in him losing second place to
Lewis Hamilton (who had started in third). Vettel was passed by Button in the second pit-stop phase, and was then passed by Alonso in the third. Hamilton slipped back from second to fifth, predominantly in the pit-stops; debris from a collision between himself and
Felipe Massa caused a safety car period in the race. The second Red Bull of
Mark Webber finished in fourth position.
As a consequence of the race, Vettel secured the
World Drivers' Championship for the second year in succession, having only required one point prior to the weekend to be declared World Champion. Button remained in second place on the standings after his victory, extending the gap over third-placed Alonso to eight points. In the
World Constructors' Championship, Red Bull's championship lead over McLaren was cut to 130 points, with Ferrari a further 96 points behind in third position.
Great job with getting
List of First Ladies of the United States up to featured list status! I have nominated the article to go up on the main page in the Today's Featured List section. Some concerns about the article have been raised
here. If you are willing to help address these concerns, it would be greatly appreciated.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on
SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from
Nettrom (
talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. --
SuggestBot (
talk) 12:57, 17 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Television episode and season articles badly needed
London's utility bosses agree action plan for less disruptive roadworks
Tube set to post most reliable performance figures for a decade
Spiderweb reduces theft on London transport by 14 per cent
February
Contractors shortlisted to save tens of millions of pounds through new joint highway works
Read it and bin it, newspapers can cause Tube delays
Crime continues to fall on London's bus network
First passengers jump aboard the new bus for London
Mayor brings London's rail industry together to get set for the London 2012 Games
Freight operators and their customers urged to prepare for London 2012 Games with launch of new campaign
Crystal Palace improvement work to begin
New online process announced for London Service Permits
Mayor steps up HGV safety campaign to benefit cyclists and pedestrians
New card to make travel easier for people with hidden disabilities
Art on the Underground launches Canary Wharf Screen at Tube station
Cycling grants to help communities ride to the 2012 Games
Blackfriars Underground station reopens to cater for influx of passengers
Work begins to cool the platforms at two major central London stations
War on fare dodgers increases as penalty charges go up this weekend
Less than one month to go until Barclays Cycle Hire goes east
Changes to travel around Paddington Station due to Crossrail works
Incident response on the Tube to be boosted under 'Blue Light' trial
London Tramlink upgrade continues
TfL confirms priority junctions for cycle safety review
Project News
Articles
Baker Street and Waterloo Railway is on track to be Today's Featured Article on the Main Page on 10th March, the 106th anniversary of the line's opening
Hello, Matthewedwards/Archives/2012. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I'm suspicious. I think
RickTyers (
talk·contribs),
Mussolinispas (
talk·contribs) and
Anony1212 (
talk·contribs) are the same person. The user pages are very similar and make me recall some old Indian socks I dealt with many years ago (unconnected I'm sure) that followed the same pattern of "I'm from [insert Western location here] but am currently in [insert Indian location here]". There seems to be a class project wrt the school article on WP. If some accounts are socks then this affects the FPC and
a deletion discussion on the school template. It seems more likely that Rick is at school rather than a "professional photographer", though the FPC was taken with the Canon EOS 5D Mark II noted on his user page. Rick's commons account has other uploaded photos with no EXIF data but similar small-web-page-size proportions that are suspicious. They could be legit but why not upload the original size? There's an upload of a
poorly scanned photo of Rajiv Gandhi at the Doon School that was really taken
in 1985 and is almost certainly the copyright of someone else. Some admin-level investigations required?
Colin°
Talk 20:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Hi, Colin. I wouldn't like to hazzard a guess as to whom these people are. I noticed that most are new accounts and that most are involved in editing the school's article, and that they've posted on each others' talk pages. If they aren't the same person, it's a safe bet to say they all know each other personally. The Rajiv Ghandi photo we have is definitely not Commons suitable, but it does seem to be an alternate version to that at The South Asian Life & Times, at least from comparing size and colouring. I'm no photographer or image manipulator though so I don't know if it's possible to get one from the other. Some investigation into the editors may be warranted, but despite being an admin, I wouldn't know where to start with that! Matthewedwards :
Chat 23:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as
File:Matthewedwards.svg has been listed for
speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case
[2][3]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because images on Wikipedia need to be compatible with the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike or another
free license, which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our
non-free content guidelines for more more information.
If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} to license it under the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. Note, if you did create this file, you may want to upload it to
Wikimedia Commons, which will allow the image to be accessed by all Wikimedia Foundation projects (which include the various localized versions of Wikipedia)
If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of
fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from
this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and
request that they make the media available under a free license.
What a wall of text! Nevermind all that. The image is licensed under the GFDL-1.2 only template, which has been deprecated since 2009. You might want to switch it to something like {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} instead. Cheers!
Kaldari (
talk) 23:36, 22 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Is the license depreciated on Wikipedia only, or in general? I tried to make it as restrictive as possible because as the file description says, it's just my sandbox for my svg files. Matthewedwards :
Chat 23:38, 22 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Just a quick note: I did do the one particular line you mentioned. It doesn't quite work on long/lat lines, I don't think, because of their odd curvature, so I didn't repeat it on the others. In any case, you're welcome to make any such alterations yourself, or nudge me further on them, I don't mind. Grandiose(
me,
talk,
contribs) 18:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)reply
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on
SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from
Nettrom (
talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. --
SuggestBot (
talk) 12:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)reply
WikiCup 2012 March newsletter
We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well! Grapple X (
submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's Cwmhiraeth (
submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in
marine biology and
herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's Casliber (
submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including
ornithology and
botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.
It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
J Milburn (
talk •
email) and
The ed17 (
talk •
email) 23:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)reply