January

Article Feedback Tool - notes and office hours

Hey guys! Another month, another newsletter.

First off - the first bits of AFT5 are now deployed. As of early last week, the various different designs are deployed on 0.1 percent of articles, for a certain "bucket" of randomly-assigned readers. With the data flooding in from these, we were able to generate a big pool of comments for editors to categorise as "useful" or "not useful". This information will be used to work out which form is the "best" form, producing the most useful feedback and the least junk. Hopefully we'll have the data for you by the end of the week; I can't thank the editors who volunteered to hand-code enough; we wouldn't be where we are now without you.

All this useful information means we can move on to finalising the tool, and so we're holding an extra-important office hours session on Friday, 6th January at 19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. If you can't make it, drop me a note and I'll be happy to provide logs so you can see what went on - if you can make it, but will turn up late, bear in mind that I'll be hanging around until 23:00 UTC to deal with latecomers :).

Things we'll be discussing include:

The design of the feedback page, which will display all the feedback gathered through whichever form comes out on top.
An expansion of the pool of articles which have AFT5 displayed, from 0.1 percent to 0.3 (which is what we were going to do initially anyway)
An upcoming Request for Comment that will cover (amongst other things) who can access various features in the tool, such as the "hide" button.

If you can't make it to the session, all this stuff will be displayed on the talkpage soon after, so no worries ;). Hope to see you all there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 04:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Owai u?

You can go ahead and do it if you want. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, you do it. I'm busy with Joy. :P HurricaneFan 25 — 14:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Interview: The Gardner interview

News and notes: Things bubbling along as Wikimedians enjoy their holidays

WikiProject report: Where are they now? Part III

Featured content: Ghosts of featured content past, present, and future

Arbitration report: New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

Your GOCE request

Hi. I'm just tidying up the GOCE requests page, and I see that Hurricane Debra (1959) has now achieved GA (well done!). Are you still seeking a copy edit for it, or may I remove the request now? Regards, --Stfg (talk) 17:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can remove the request. HurricaneFan 25 — 17:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 18:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to my talkpage

This edit to my talk page made me giggle :P I think I've had the sig more than 6 months before and you're the first person to comment! (Kind of made my day in a strange and nerdy way... Did not mean for that to rhyme.) I was expecting more people to think it was the {{unsigned}} template than not. Oh well... :P — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 19:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Storm Irene GAN

Pursuant to the merge, I've marked the GAN as failed. I feel bad doing it, as there was a good thing going there, but the way you work, I have no doubt you'll bounce back and have something for me to pass in a GAN in a week or two. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AfD closures

Hello Hurricanefan25. When redirecting articles as you did here, please remember to include the {{R from school}} template. It populates an important category that is used for statistical purposes. Thanks, and happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Joy

Would joy be any easier if i did the MH and you did the impact?.Jason Rees (talk) 15:34, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks. :) (I can only hope we don't edit-conflict each other...) 15:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thats fine - let me finish Susan's impact and then i will turn my attention to Joy. (ps if you want to avoid edit conflicts one good way is to put ((In use|section}} on the section your editing).Jason Rees (talk) 15:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'll be putting more attention to Judith and Ike for now, though I'll probably get to Joy in a week or two. HurricaneFan 25 17:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On the job training

Here's the basics of SCV, which may be useful to any talk page stalkers as well. We need all hands. :) Or more hands, anyway.

Very thorough, but brief as possible: When Corensearchbot finds (or thinks it finds) copying in a new article, it flags the article and notifies the contributor and lists the article for review at WP:SCV.

There are collapsed detailed instructions at the top of the page, but the basic approach is as follows. If this looks daunting, please keep in mind that no volunteer has to handle any listing they don't want to get involved with. If you don't want to handle {{Db-g4}} issues, leave it alone. Somebody else will do it. Any and all help you can give will be appreciated, whether you decide to master every task or not!

Please let me know if any of the below can be clarified. I may well turn it into a mini guideline for others, so clarity matters! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SCV 101

Is the flagged source another Wikipedia article or a mirror of another Wikipedia article? This is sign of a split or a copy-paste move. Look at the history of the article:

Is it a properly attributed split? You don't need to do anything to it except remove the CSB notice, if it's still there.
Is it a repost of a PRODded article? An administrator may be needed to restore the history for attribution. Feel free to ping me.
Is it a repost of an AFDed article? {{Db-g4}} may be appropriate. Be sure to give the contributor the notice the tag generates.
Is it a copy-paste move? Honestly, I think I'd tag that one like so: {{db-g6|rationale=Copy-paste move of [[Title]]; needs to be deleted for proper move}}.
Is it an improperly attributed split? Follow Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia to address.

Is the flagged source public domain or compatibly licensed?

If the content is public domain because copyright lapsed (for age, maybe) or because the source is inherently public domain (legal judgment, for instance), remove the CSB notice, if it's still there, but make sure it attributes according to Wikipedia:Plagiarism. (If the content is just not copyrightable - like tracklists or job titles - that kind of attribution isn't needed.)
If the content is compatibly licensed, make sure that proper attribution is given in accordance with Wikipedia:Plagiarism. Even if it's compatibly licensed, it's still a violation of copyright policy if the license isn't met.

Is the flagged source completely dissimilar to the original article?

Check the history of the article; did somebody already clean it? Great. Remove the CSB tag if it's still there. If the vio was extensive, consider if revision deletion seems like a good idea to prevent future inadvertent restoration.
Is there something not immediately obvious? Sometimes websites have hidden text. For instance, CSB flagged a copy of this kind of obnoxious website, but to see the actual text that was copied, you'd have to press "About me" at the bottom of the page. If you find the copied text, skip to the next section.
Particularly if the pages are long, there might be scattered copying that could indicate close paraphrasing. Running the duplication detector (linked from the CSB template or accessed here) can help. If you find evidence of close paraphrasing, skip to the next section.
If there's nothing similar, you may have a "false positive." They happen sometimes. Remove the CSB notice and, if the contributor is upset, maybe try pointing out that false positives can be annoying, but the bot does such good work that we hope it can be overlooked.

Is the flagged source an external site that is probably under copyright?

If the article can't survive without the duplicated content and there's no reason to believe the editor who placed it here owns the copyright, tag it for {{db-G12}}.
If the duplicated content can be removed, remove it. Caveat: if somebody will copy from one source, they'll often copy from others. It's a really good idea to look at what remains to see if that may be copied from somewhere else. I do google snippet checks. I find this is particularly likely when an article about a company copies content from the company website; other sections are often taken from other pages of the company website. You don't have to notify the contributor of anything; CSB did that already.
If the duplicated content can't be easily removed and you think the editor who placed it here may own it or you think that the article can be rewritten, instead tag it with {{copyvio}}. It generates two notices in a box in the lower right corner. Drop one on the contributor ~~and the other at WP:CP. It tells you which and where. :)~~ (I've just realized I steered you wrong here. This is true if you find a copyvio not through SCV, but if it's at SCV, you don't have to list it again. So sorry! The SCV listing is good enough. You just put the tag on it from the notation templates saying what you've done.)

After handling the issue, note your resolution at WP:SCV. There are templates created to make this easier. When you press "edit" on the page, the notation templates are visible in a green collapse box at the very top. There are quite a few of them, but you'll find that you only routinely use a couple, and they get to be old hat very quickly.

Reverts

Thank you HF25 for reverting those edits by that idiot while I was away. Bruvtakesover (T|C) 20:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Second pair of eyes?

Hurricanefan25, I'm helping out with the Katarighe reviews.

I ran into one that I think is fine, but could use another pair of eyes. It is from 12-23. The Gun laws in South Carolina article.

Here's what I can tell:

The content does match this site
A claim is made that the "source" was copied from Wikipedia.
I don't see anything on the source saying so.
However, the WP article is a split from Gun laws in the United States (by state)
One key word “alter-ego”, was added in August 2010 here.
I don't think the source had that material in Feb 2011
There's a relevant discussion here

I think it is fair to assume that if the material was in Wikipedia before it was in FBI Criminal Background Check and Gun Laws, they've copied from us, but I'd like someone else to reach the same conclusion.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 12:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look later, when I have the time. HurricaneFan 25 18:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, in advance--SPhilbrick (Talk) 18:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a for-profit site, (there's a "please donate to us" link or something like that), and given that their "claim of copyright" notice for the content on that page is from January 2010 at latest (see older copyright notice from the "17 captures" link from the Wayback Machine), and the added content was from August, it looks like the site was using it purely from Wikipedia, as many commercial sites do. See also [1] - the text is not from Wikipedia, so it could be their own work. It's not on any other site, either, so the above article you mentioned could have been a copyvio. It's possible that took it from Wikipedia, though I'm not 100% sure. I'd send it to WP:CP for attention. HurricaneFan 25 21:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, thanks for looking into this. (Nit alert - when you said "for-profit" did you mean "not-for-profit"? I didn't see the request, but I normally associate requests for donations with "not-for-profits". However, I don't think this is central, so I won't dwell any more on it.) Second, this item is at SCV, see third item in list.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 22:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Hut8.5 provided this helpful analysis demonstrating evidence of the backwards copy when I asked the same question about Gun laws in North Carolina. The whole batch of these split pages (and the main page come to that) should probably have a backwards copy tag on their talk pages.--CharlieDelta (talk) 06:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback Tool - things to do

Hey guys! A couple of highly important things to do over the next few weeks:

We've opened a Request for Comment on several of the most important aspects of the tool, including who should be able to hide inappropriate comments. It will remain open until 20 January; I encourage everyone with an interest to take part :).
A second round of feedback categorisation will take place in a few weeks, so we can properly evaluate which design works the best and keeps all the junk out :P. All volunteers are welcome and desired; there may be foundation swag in it for you!

Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

Technological roadmap: 2011's technological achievements in review, and what 2012 may hold

News and notes: Fundraiser 2011 ends with a bang

In the news: Wikipedia ends annual fundraising drive; Monmouthpedia launches

WikiProject report: From Traditional to Experimental: WikiProject Jazz

Featured content: Contentious FAC debate: a week in review

Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Betacommand 3

Technology report: December in more detail; and why the MediaWiki codebase was "slushed" this week

A beer for you!

Many thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page - enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 06:44, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! HurricaneFan 25 17:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cup multiplier suggestions

Oh, forgot to note that I replied at WT:CUP earlier. (Just ignore me if you saw already! :) ). - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 17:41, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Hurricanefan25. You have new messages at Sp33dyphil's talk page.
Message added 00:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

--Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 00:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High , while for quality the scale goes from Low to High .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!


Stubs		Cleanup
	Trans-Asia		Irene Lentz
	Elizabeth Stuart Phelps Ward		1953 Atlantic hurricane season
	Entrainment (meteorology)		Interstate 210 (Louisiana)
	1919 Atlantic hurricane season	Merge
	Irene de Kok		Polar cyclone
	George Dawes Green		Sign language on television
	Irini Terzoglou		Los Premios MTV Latinoamérica
	Tropical Meteorology Project	Add sources
	Year of Sorrow		Covenant marriage
	1918 Atlantic hurricane season		Irene, Gauteng
	Dave Fennell		Occupy Wall Street
	Hurricane Deck, Missouri	Wikify
	Zhetysu (airline)		Georgian Airways
	Lotus Flower (song)		Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration
	List of films shot in the Philippines		Haknam High School
	Bob Sheets	Expand
	Tropical cyclone seasonal forecasting		Amagami
	Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting model		Transgender
	Hurricane belt		Effects of Hurricane Georges in Haiti

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) 01:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ACC interface access request

Confirmation edit. Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Special report: English Wikipedia to go dark on January 18

Sister projects: What are our sisters up to now?

News and notes: WMF on the looming SOPA blackout, Wikipedia turns 11, and Commons passes 12 million files

WikiProject report: WikiProject Beer

Featured content: Lecen on systemic bias in featured content

Arbitration report: Four open cases, Betacommand case deadlocked, Muhammad images close near

Technology report: ArticleFeedback moves into new trial phase; and how MediaWiki integrates with Facebook, IPv6, and PostgreSQL explored

Re: GT question

Basically, if there are any hurricanes that have their own articles but don't have the information to be a GA, then they should either be merged into the appropriate article, as some have, or would have to go through peer review to make sure everything that can be in the article is actually there. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:21, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note on Scott's page

Hi!

I didn't see your post before now, but I agree with your points.

At the same time, I noted that Scott's block may have been warranted, arguably, for a short time anyhow, because of the sanctity of ArbCom pages. (See that NW gave a formal warning on my talk page. Such warnings are important in protecting persons from arbitrary blocks, by establishing a standard of fair warning. I didn't think that NW was posturing, but rather protecting future persons by giving a fair warning to me.)

I do appreciate your note, which shows character, because I believe that we may have disagreed before. At least another hurricane specialist and I have disagreed, briefly, before chatting amiably and forgetting about it....)

Best regards, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Hello, Hurricanefan25. 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.-- DQ (t) (e) 23:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Read and acknowledged. Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 00:08, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like your advice on a GA nomination

I'm a bit worried about an Atlantic tropical storm GAN that I'm doing. I'd appreciate it if you'd please see my analysis at the bottom of Talk:Tropical Storm Colin (2010)/GA1, and share your thoughts (either there, or in private via email). I'm also asking Cyclonebiskit, BTW. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:28, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback Tool

Hey guys; apologies for the belated nature of this notification; as you can probably imagine, the whole blackout thing kinda messed with our timetables :P. Just a quick reminder that we've got an office hours session tomorrow at 19:00 in #wikimedia-office, where we'll be discussing the results of the hand-coding and previewing some new changes. Hope to see you there :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Article for deletion

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Article for deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update: new user warning test results available

Hi WP:UWTEST member, we wanted to share a quick update on the status of the project. Here's the skinny:

We're happy to say we have a new round of testing results available! Since there are tests on several Wikipedias, we're collecting all results at the project page on Meta. We've also now got some help from Wikimedia Foundation data analyst Ryan Faulkner, and should have more test results in the coming weeks.
Last but not least, check out the four tests currently running at the documentation page.

Thanks for your interest, and don't hesitate to drop by the talk page if you have a suggestion or question. Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

office hours

Another notification, guys; Article Feedback Tool office hours on Friday at 19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office :). If you can't attend, drop me a note and I'll send you the logs when we're done. We're also thinking of moving it to thursday at a later time: say, 22:00 UTC. Speak up if that'd appeal more :) Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

News and notes: SOPA blackout, Orange partnership

In the news: World watched as Wikipedia shut down for SOPA blackout

WikiProject report: The Golden Horseshoe: WikiProject Toronto

Featured content: Interview with Muhammad Mahdi Karim and the best of the week

Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Muhammad images, AUSC call for applications

Technology report: Looking ahead to MediaWiki 1.19 and related issues

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High , while for quality the scale goes from Low to High .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!


Stubs		Cleanup
	Solanum cajanumense		Paraguay
	Weatherwise		Butterflies and Hurricanes
	Lixion Avila		Ellen Barkin
	Sternpost	Merge
	Hurricane engineering		Tropical Depression Ten (1994)
	Dania Beach Hurricane		Index of Economic Freedom 2003–2006
	Luo Yixiu		Junkanoo
	Frank Umont	Add sources
	Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricanes		1923 Atlantic hurricane season
	History of tropical cyclone-spawned tornadoes		Spontaneous human combustion
	Hurricane Electric		Florida
	Dou Gu	Wikify
	Vinh Stadium		Protectorate of the Western Regions
	Hurricane (Athlete song)		Carmelo Arden Quin
	Hurricane Punch		Courtney Coventry
	David M. Roth	Expand
	Feng Yi		Hurricane Gordon (1994)
	Minister over the Masses		Effects of Hurricane Georges in Florida
	USS Hurricane (PC-3)		Hurricanes (Pull Tiger Tail song)

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) 02:55, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

News and notes: Update on Global Development, Wikipedia Day NYC is a success, JFK audio on Commons

In the news: Zambian wiki-assassins, Foundation über alles, editor engagement and the innovation plateau

Recent research: Language analyses examine power structure and political slant; Wikipedia compared to commercial databases

WikiProject report: Digging Up WikiProject Palaeontology

Featured content: Featured content soaring this week

Arbitration report: Five open cases, voting on proposed decisions in two cases

Technology report: Why "Lua" is on everybody's lips, and when to expect MediaWiki 1.19

February

WikiCup 2012 January newsletter

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely 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 could 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 and The ed17 00:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

If you continue removing Rlevse sockpuppet tags, I'm going to open up a thread about you on the administrator's noticeboard. Raul654 (talk) 22:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring BarkingMoon's user page. I use his abbreviations and copied the category gnomes there. He was a good one, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP addresses

Why on earth would you publicly discuss details about an editor's IP address? Please don't do that again. 28bytes (talk) 22:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm

What's up? Worm^TT · (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. Calabe 1992 15:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar For You! December 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	With great appreciation, I award you this barnstar for completing Good Article reviews for the December 2011 Good Article Nomination backlog elimination drive Cheers,AstroCog (talk) 22:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

USRD WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2012


Volume 5, Issue 1 • Winter 2011 • About the Newsletter
This edition is going out to all USRD WikiProject members (current, former, or potential) in addition to other subscribers as part of a roll call to update the participants list. Anyone that would like to continue to receive this newsletter in the future needs to update the subscription list if they are not already subscribed.
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features U.S. Roads consolidates M-6 article makes headlines Planning Department debuts Stub drive concludes early, successfully Editorial	State and national updates Project news Task force reports for MD, MI, PA, and VA
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—Imzadi 1979 → 22:04, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Metros

I was just wondering, should I do future Metros to here or your alt? Oh and welcome. Simply south...... having large explosions for 5 years 23:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To my alt, thanks. Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 22:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

News and notes: The Foundation visits Tunisia, analyzes donors

In the news: Leading scholar hails Wikipedia, historians urged to contribute while PR pros remain shunned

Discussion report: Discussion swarms around Templates for deletion and returning editors of colourful pasts

WikiProject report: The Eye of the Storm: WikiProject Tropical Cyclones

Featured content: Talking architecture with MrPanyGoff

Arbitration report: Four open cases, final decision in Muhammad images, Betacommand 3 near closure

Technology report: October's coding challenge: results now in; progress on 1.19 steady; and why for a while interwiki links were no more

Talk page

I've made it 97% instead of 825px as different people have different screen sizes. It was too small for me the box. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 00:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soap Operas

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soap Operas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Special report: Fundraising proposals spark a furore among the chapters

News and notes: Foundation launches Legal and Community Advocacy department

In the news: Scholars and spindoctors contend with the emergent wikiorder

In focus: Skirmishes in the 'great sectarian war of the Internet'

WikiProject report: WikiProject Stub Sorting

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Betacommand 3 closed, proposed decision in Civility enforcement, AUSC candidates announced

Technology report: January sees prototype new geodata API; but February looks to be a testing time for top developers

Reminder

Just a reminder to say that we use pressure data from Reunion, not the NRL. :) Bruvtakesover (T|C) 15:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Category talk:NPOV disputes

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:NPOV disputes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

	reviewing eyes
	Thank you for reviewing in the Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky! Paraphrasing (I hope not too closely): If everybody who read this looked at one more article it could be over today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's over, thanks also to you! 719 of 729 articles were found with no problems. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Special report: The plight of the new page patrollers

News and notes: Fundraiser row continues, new director of engineering

Discussion report: Discussion on copyrighted files from non-US relation states

WikiProject report: WikiProject Poland

Featured content: The best of the week

Arbitration report: Civility enforcement closed, proposed decision in TimidGuy, two cases remain open

Technology report: Major strands of development cycle coalesce as 1.19 is deployed to first wikis

My RfA

Thanks for your support at my RfA, which was successful and nearly unanimous. Be among the first to see my L-plate! – Fayenatic L (talk) 13:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mediterranean tropical cyclone

With all of the new refs that have been added to User:Atomic7732/Mediterranean tropical cyclone, can we restore this article, and with its contents? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, can I take that as a yes? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to, but IMO that version isn't written very well (no offense). I have a sandbox for the article in my userspace, but I don't feel like working on it at the moment. HF 25 00:17, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

News and notes: Finance meeting fallout, Gardner recommendations forthcoming

Recent research: Gender gap and conflict aversion; collaboration on breaking news; effects of leadership on participation; legacy of Public Policy Initiative

Discussion report: Focus on admin conduct and editor retention

WikiProject report: Just don't call it "sci-fi": WikiProject Science Fiction

Featured content: By plane, by ship, and by stagecoach: Featured content goes trekking this week

Arbitration report: Final decision in TimidGuy ban appeal, one case remains open

Technology report: 1.19 deployment stress, Meta debates whether to enforce SUL

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012 Moving images drive

Hi there! I thought you might be interested in the WikiProject Images and Media's March 2012 Moving files to commons drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 10,000 files so we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions! If you have a spare moment, please join and move a file or two, or tell other users. Thanks so much!

Note: The drive officially starts in 12 years ago, but you can sign up now!

Delivered by —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 5:48pm • on 07:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

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) 23:59, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March

Retired

Any reason why you "retired"?.Jason Rees (talk) 13:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneFan's edit summary references a lack of time. I know it's a problem that a lot of editors have faced, and I for one hope that in the future HF'll find some time and space to starting editing again. - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 13:58, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it is sad to see you go. Good luck with your future life. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 15:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bye Bye, HF25, I'll miss you. I hope you come back some time. J G ^{(edits · sandbox)} 02:23, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes and good luck. →Σ τ c. 01:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A shame, another good user leaving. We've had too much of that recently. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]