User talk:QuicoleJR

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

WikiProject Users

(Rated C-class, Low-importance)

	This editor is within the scope of WikiProject Users, a collaborative effort to rate Wikipedia editors to assess the value of their contributions to the encyclopedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can contest your rating and see a list of open tasks.^[Humor]
C	This user has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Low	This user has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Improving health vital articles

Hello,

I noticed you said you were looking to improve those articles. There are a lot of omissions, but you mentioned more technical proposals. I'm a bit interested in public health as a side focus, so I wanted to reach out and see what you're thinking about on those. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By technical proposals, I meant the kind of scientific articles that would be proposed on the talk subpage for STEM articles. These kinds of proposals seem to get participants more slowly than proposals on the Society or People pages. I have been working to make these proposals to improve the list, but it has been slow, since I don't want to overwhelm the page with too many of my own proposals at once. I would certainly appreciate help in getting the Health section up to the quota. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Yeah its really no surprise that people are more interested in people and such then more technical concepts. I'll try to vote more on those and see if there are any that should be preposed. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 06:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I voted on a lot of stuff for level five that should be able to be closed. I don't actually know how to close stuff on there, or add something to the list. Something to look into learning. Anyway, if you find anything that needs to be added feel free to ping me and if I agree (probably more likely then not if its medical) then I'll try to vote and move things along. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't pinging you be canvassing? QuicoleJR (talk) 18:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idk? I wouldn't vote for something I don't agree with but it might look bad you're right. I'll just try to check there more. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 00:51, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:33, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, joy.

Bah. At this rate they're making games faster than I can write an article about them. Panini! • 🥪 02:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon Smile

Would you mind if I did some work on Pokémon Smile to prepare it for a potential GAN? It's a pretty small topic to begin with (A search yields mostly just news hits and reviews) but I feel there's definitely enough to improve it from its current state. I figured I'd ask in case you want to do the work and improve it yourself, given you created the page. If you'd like to hit it up instead, I can share the sources I found during my search so you don't have to do the work for that. If you are fine with me hitting up the article instead, would you like to be listed as co-nom if the article's in a state where a GAN is possible? Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I would love to take the article to Good Article status. This would be my first GA, so I would certainly appreciate your help. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@QuicoleJR grabbed basically everything I could find.

Reviews: [1][2]

Announcements: [3][4][5][6]

Miscellaneous: [7][8] (These two aren't reviews but are still technically opinion pieces) [9] (Can't see content due to paywall but it's a big source so) [10] (Opinion piece)

Update Info: [11][12][13]

Release: [14]

Coverage is a bit sparse and some of this may be repetitive, which is why I'm a bit cautious about the GA potential here. I think it's got a shot here, but it definitely depends on how much can be gleaned out of the opinion pieces. Gonna be a smaller end article, but perusing these sources should be quick. Paywalled source is annoying, so if it can't be accessed it's whatever, but it's worthwhile to save on the talk page if it doesn't pan out.

Hopefully this helps. I wish there was some dev info, but coverage on this game is light. Best of luck! Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 November newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round being a very tight race. Our new champion is AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), who scored 2,283 points mainly through 3 high-multiplier FAs and 3 GAs on military history topics. By a 1% margin, Airship beat out last year's champion, BeanieFan11 (submissions), who scored second with 2,264 points, mainly from an impressive 58 GAs about athletes. In third place, Generalissima (submissions) scored 1,528 points, primarily from two FAs on U.S. Librarians of Congress and 20 GAs about various historical topics. Our other finalists are: Sammi Brie (submissions) with 879 points, Hey man im josh (submissions) with 533 points, BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 432 points, Arconning (submissions) with 244 points, and AryKun (submissions) with 15 points. Congratulations to our finalists and all who participated!

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 7 FAs, 9 FLs, 94 GAs, 73 FAC reviews, and 79 GAN reviews and peer reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

Generalissima (submissions) wins the featured article prize for 3 FAs in round 4, and 7 FAs overall.
Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize for 23 FLs overall.
MaranoFan (submissions) wins the featured topic prize for 9 articles in featured topics in round 1.
Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize for 110 FA/FL reviews overall.
BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize for 58 GAs in round 5, and 70 GAs overall.
Fritzmann (submissions) wins the good topic prize for 6 articles in good topics in round 2.
Sammi Brie (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize for 45 GA reviews in round 2, and 78 GA reviews overall.
BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 131 Did you know articles overall.
Muboshgu (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 15 In the news articles in round 1, and 36 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2025 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"in future" vs "in the future" in open letter

Hi QuicoleJR -- Is this some UK vs US thing? In future reads much better to me. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 01:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's a regional difference. I actually didn't know that British English dropped the "the" until now. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The extra "the" feels very clunky to me, especially given that "the future" repeats in the next sentence. The letter has a weird history, as I drafted it (Brit) in a hurry, based on frankensteining writing from several different editors from all over the place, but honestly I think we're best just leaving the wording alone now that people are trying to sign. It was always going to be quick and dirty rather than long and polished given that our aim is to get a weight of signatures by the 8th, ie today! Espresso Addict (talk) 01:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. As a Canadian, both sound all right, but in this case I thought "in future" sounded smoother. Cremastra (u — c) 22:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]