User talk:Monowi

{{User Good Articles reviewed|6|User:Rjanag/GA reviews}}

which displays as

This user has reviewed 6 Good Article nominations on Wikipedia.

There is more information on how to do this at Template:User Good Articles reviewed.

Note: If you are not interested in doing this, you don't have to do anything; the template will still work for you exactly as it does now.

Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words. But really the project owes you more thanks than me. I've basically been a non-editor for about a year now, while you've managed to promote the Ozzie Smith article to FA (finally!) and are still continuing to work and edit. So really, thank you. While I may have started the project, your contributions have been a hundred times over more numerous and important than mine. I'm just pleased my small effort had lead to such big contributions by others. Timpcrk87 (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a fuller message there. Please reply at your convenience.208.120.7.152 (talk) 06:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't perceive that we're operating at cross-purposes here, and I hope you won't either. Your most recent Musial edits all look fine and sensible to me. I've added references for both the "lost '48 home run" quotes... both originally come from books, so perhaps even better refs can be added later.

I wrote about my 8/5 edits to the intro in some detail on the Musial talk page (explanation on July 20, edits on August 5). I hope that will help illuminate their premises and reasoning, and I'd be happy to explain further if needed. The intro's two main problems (as I saw them) were its style (phraseology, copyediting), and its emphases (there was more space devoted to his sandlot ball, year in the Navy and year as GM than to Stan Musial the actual baseball player).

I doubt you're unhappy about the statistical information I added to the Musial intro. As for the other edits, many other players with lengthier and more significant WW2 absences than Musial's (e.g. Ted Williams, Warren Spahn, Bob Feller, et al) have Wiki intros that mention their military service in passing, or not at all. The same goes for virtually all players' pre-MLB careers, except where compellingly notable (e.g. Daisuke Matsuzaka, Lefty Grove). Going by the examples of other players' articles, the athletic activity of their youth is generally not considered intro-worthy material, particularly since that period of their life is typically the very next item in the full article.

I hope you will be reassured to learn that I've been editing Wikipedia for several years, albeit under anonymous IP addresses. My reasons for doing so are simple. I've seen far too many situations on this site that have turned nasty and personal, and feuds that extended past the point of original disagreement. Over the years, my provider has naturally rotated my IP address, which minimizes the possibility of longterm, one-on-one conflicts. Also, I have no interest in building a Wikipedia profile or reputation (aspiring to an admin slot, amassing article reviews, commendations, etc.). There's nothing wrong with those ambitions, of course. I just don't have 'em. Since official Wikipedia policy prohibits bias against contributions by anonymous editors, the only major drawback to anonymity is that I'm occasionally obliged to explain my status and history, as I'm doing right now. I'm always ready to interact and collaborate with any Wikipedia user.

If you're curious to see other baseball-related articles that I have substantially edited (in some cases, over 50% of the text is directly attributable to me), you can go to Spahn,

Pedro Martinez, Greg Maddux, and others. If you're really curious (or incredibly bored), you can investigate the edit history of Rickey Henderson's intro, before I was able to streamline the prose and shoehorn in a lot of competing information to the other editors' satisfaction. I hope these articles will be to your liking, will soothe any concerns you may have about my editing ability or intent, and will generally mesh with your ultimate goals for Stan Musial's page.208.120.7.152 (talk) 14:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I've made a few edits for style, added a few references, restored a little text, and done some general polishing to the bottom half of Musial's page. Take a look when you get a chance. Thanks!208.120.7.152 (talk) 08:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(cross-posted on User_talk:208.120.7.152)

Monowi-- Your paternal interest in my Wikipedia apprenticeship is misplaced. I've been editing Wikipedia for more than five years, and have never been unavailable to other editors. In fact, we're interacting right now! I understand that some editors prefer dealing with a username to an IP address, but I don't. What if I'd edited the page as "MusialFan1" instead of "208.120.7.152"? How would that have impacted your opinion of anything regarding this discussion?

You've cited

Let's take "importance" first. WP:LEAD says the following-- "The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic." Thus, the inclusion of Stan Musial's high school baseball days and uneventful year in the service are out of place in a Wikipedia intro. Ted Williams' five years as a military pilot are dealt with in 10 words in his Wiki intro, then detailed later. Bob Feller was the first player to enlist; his years of service aren't mentioned at all in his intro. Warren Spahn fought in the Battle of the Bulge; no intro mention. Yogi Berra landed at D-Day; no intro mention. Wiki bio after Wiki bio of the 500+ WW2-era baseball players follow the same pattern. Their leads omit this information, but you keep reinserting Stan Musial's time at the Philadelphia Navy Yard into the second paragraph. Is this according to WP:LEAD?

In a similar vein, other than your own Ozzie Smith text, I can find almost no examples of a prominent baseball player whose high school (and pre-high school) activity is highlighted in their Wikipedia introduction. David Clyde's intro emphasizes it, but that's because Clyde's fame is entirely predicated on the fact that he went directly to the major leagues from high school, and burned out doing so. Musial's fame doesn't derive from his teenaged years. Other than being switched from pitcher to hitter (which IS referenced in the intro), there's nothing unusual about his path to St. Louis. WP:LEAD states, "In general, the relative emphasis given to material in the lead should reflect its relative importance to the subject." And Stan Musial isn't remembered by history or the public as a former sailor who once attended Donora High School.

Next, "context." Your current revert has taken valuable context out of the intro, notably his rankings in various offensive categories at the time of his retirement. Musial is currently 28th on the all-time HR list, for example, but increases in power numbers have radically changed MLB's leader boards. It adds perspective to the reader to note that in 1963, Musial was 5th. You've also removed the two quotes by his peers that attest to Musial's reputation within the game. For the second time, your edits have wiped those quotes entirely off the page. Meanwhile, your revised intro now mentions Musial's 1969 HoF election twice, along with double mentions for his nickname, and his World Series wins. You've called the result the "last revision that had a decent lead section," but I'd like to hear why.

No, I don't "happen to like Nate Colbert," but the fact that one of the only two players in baseball history to hit 5 HRs was physically at the other one's doubleheader is certainly worth a sentence-- Colbert's Wikipedia page mentions the coincidence in an identical manner. It has to be more notable than Musial's nondescript 2,957th career hit, for instance, or his hoping to get his 3,000th hit at home (like every milestone player ever), or a non-historic 1-for-15 stretch in a 10.900-at-bat career (e.g. Musial began 1955 hitting 3-for-19, and began 1956 hitting 2-for-15). Meanwhile, you oppose the much-reported two-baseball incident that has made its way into numerous baseball books and websites (and which you mistakenly said was unreferenced).

Other references you've deleted include the box scores for the pair of games in which Musial had the Cards' only hit. Surely these are more useful Wiki links than another Lansche ref; also, both of the dates you've reverted to are incorrect. A POV alert: Musial didn't "spoil" either of the no-hitters, since his hits were mid-game ones. You've also removed useful context from the article, such as where Musial's consecutive game streak stands historically, or the context and aftermath of the 1957 All-Star voting.

We know that it's common for Wiki's editors to take a proprietary interest in certain pages or topics. Yes, Wikipedia policy advises against it, but I don't think it's so bad when it's done in a positive way. So I appreciate your stewardship of the Stan Musial page. However, I left fairly lengthy explanations of my previous edits on both the Musial discussion page and your talk page, and I asked you directly for specific objections. That I should get a username and learn how to someday improve isn't exactly the fulsome reply I was anticipating.

Therefore, I'm again asking you to explain why you feel the particular, specific text that's come and gone in your edits should have come, and should have gone.

I won't make any further edits or re-reverts until we've come to some consensus. Your obvious seriousness of purpose and interest in improving Cardinal articles convinces me that we will.208.120.7.152 (talk) 05:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Monowi. You appear to be back on the site more frequently after a quieter stretch. I'd still appreciate a response to the above set of concerns, before I resume editing in accordance with WP:LEAD and other Featured Articles for baseball stars. It appears there have only been 8 of those (unless you count Jim Thorpe), and I'm sure we can work together to make this #9. Thanks a lot!208.120.6.244 (talk) 08:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I'd prefer not to interfere with the Good Article nom by making it "unstable" with edits, but you have not responded to my specific queries. Please do so. I assume you know that one of Wikipedia's behavorial guidelines is "Do not avoid questions." (

WP:EQ) Thank you.208.120.152.75 (talk) 18:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Hey, just letting you know this article is now on hold for GA status. Not much to fix, it's a very good article, though hopefully the fixes will take place quickly given how bad the backlog is. Wizardman _{Help review good articles} 19:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted to address your concerns.--

When you pass a GA don't forget to update the talk page templates.--

WP:FOUR) 13:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

The Baseball Barnstar

		The Baseball Barnstar
		For incredible work on Stan Musial. I am awarding you this barnstar.KANESUE 12:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing this article. I have made some fixes to the article and left comments on the GAN page. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:54, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you taking the time to review this article. It was unfortunate that your absence cut off the possibility of dialog during the review period, but I believe that the article has definitely improved as a result of the review. I have requested a Good Article Reassessment, which can be found at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Bobby Kay/1. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

here . Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was closed before I was able to address your final concerns. However, I have changed the article as you suggested. Thank you very much for your time.--William S. Saturn (talk) 16:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy G. left you this message - Has there been an image review? If not, please locate an image reviewer...Modernist (talk) 17:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done thanks to DCGeist...Modernist (talk) 23:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Monowi. You have new messages at NYKevin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on November 17, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 17, 2010. If you think that it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 06:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All-Star, Smith accumulated 2,460 hits and 580 stolen bases during his career, and won the National League Silver Slugger Award as the best hitter at shortstop in 1987. Smith continued to earn Gold Gloves and All Star appearances on an annual basis until 1993, and later missed nearly three months of the 1995 season after undergoing shoulder surgery. After tension between Smith and his new manager Tony La Russa developed in 1996, Smith decided to retire at season's end, and subsequently had his uniform number (# 1) retired by the Cardinals. Smith served as host of the television show This Week in Baseball from 1997 to 1999, and continues to be an entrepreneur in a variety of business ventures. (more...

)

here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 00:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Hey. Just thought I'd stop by and see how things are coming with this article. Hopefully I'll see it at GAN soon. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:56, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was on HLN this morning. Daniel Christensen (talk) 14:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Monowi,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The Helpful Bot 16:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Bob Gibson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim Northrup (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you are receiving this message because you are currently a participant of WikiProject Good articles. Since the creation of the WikiProject, over 200 user's have joined to help review good article nominations and contribute to other sections of the WikiProject. Over the years, several of these users have stopped reviewing articles and/or have become inactive with the project but are still listed as participates. In order to improve communications with other participants and get newsletters sent out faster (newsletters will begin to be sent out monthly starting in October) all participants that are no longer active with the WikiProject will be removed from the participants list.

If you are still interested in being a participant for this WikiProject, please sign your user name here and please help review some articles so we can reduce the size of the backlog. If you are no longer interested, you do not need to sign your name anywhere and your name will be removed from the participants list after the deadline. Remember that even if you are not interested at this time, you can always re-add your name to the list whenever you want. The deadline to sign your name on the page above will be November 1, 2012. Thank-you. 13:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for having to send out a second message but a user has brought to my attention that a point mentioned in the first message should be clarified. If user's don't sign on this page, they will be moved to an "Inactive Participants" list rather then be being removed from the entire WikiProject. Sorry for any confusion.--Dom497 (talk)15:20, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume III, No. 1 – October 2012 September-December 2008, 2009, 2010, January-April 2011 | November 2012 Project News[1] There are currently 15,862 Good Articles listed at WP:GA . The backlog at WP:GAN and review an article! Even just reviewing one will help! The oldest unreviewed articles are: General sejm, Prime Minister of Vietnam, Tanisha Thomas, Kosta Pećanac, and Jilly Kitzinger . The categories with the largest backlogs are: Social sciences and society (80 articles), Sports and recreation (70 articles), Music (63 articles), Theatre, film and drama (52 articles), and History (41 articles). Please consider reviewing articles within these sections. There are currently 13 articles up for reassessment at WP:GAR and review an article! Remember that anyone can review articles that are listed under "Community Reassessment" even if another user has already listed their opinion...the more opinions, the better! Member News There are currently 222 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to all the new members that joined during the past 17 months! If you aren't yet part of WikiProject Good Articles and interested in joining WikiProject Good Articles, go here and add you name. Everyone is welcomed! This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! If you haven't done so already, please remember to add your name to this list if you are still interested/active with this WikiProject. If you are no longer interested/active you don't need to add your name anywhere, you're name will be moved into a "inactive participant" list at the beginning of November. Inactive users will not receive future newsletters from this WikiProject via their talk page. GA Task forces There is currently not much going on at this time but there is a very large backlog. Until the next backlog elimination drive, please help reduce the number of nominations by reviewing articles and helping other reviewers that may need second opinions. Thanks to everyone who committed some time to help reduce the nominations backlog during the June-July 2012 backlog elimination drive . Most barnstars have been given out but there are still a few left. Participants that haven't gotten a barnstar yet should get it soon. Possible Fall/Winter 2012 Backlog Elimination Drive A discussion is currently being held on the WikiProject's talk page on weather another eliminations drive should take place within the next few months as the last one proved to be extremely successful. Please take the time to go to the the talk page and include your opinion on if you would be interested in taking part in a Fall/Winter 2012 elimination drive. Good Articles of the Month Each month, 5 random good articles will be choose to be featured here as the good articles of the month. Barry (dog) I Love Bees Miles Copeland (Home and Away) London Country North East The Daily Show Some Tips About References/Sources Having references included in articles is one of the most important aspects to a good article, let alone Wikipedia! Without them, no one would ever know what is true and what is false and Wikipedia probably wouldn't be where it is today. So this month, I will talk about how to check for references, how reliable they are, and so on and so forth. The first thing to do when reviewing an nominee is to do a quick scan of the article. One of the things to look for is if the article has references! If you don't see a list at the bottom of the article page, quick-fail it.[2] For newcomers, quick-failing is failing an article when you spot a problem before actually conducting a full review. If you do find a list of references (and in most cases you will) make sure to look through each and every one. If you want to save some time, use this tool as it will tell you if there are any problematic references in the article you are reviewing. Next, check the reliability and type of the references/sources. In terms of the type of reference, check to see how many primary and/or secondary sources are included. Primary sources are the ones published by the subject of the article. For example, if the subject of the article has to do with the iPhone 4s and the source is published by Apple, it is considered a primary source. Secondary sources are those not published by the subject of the article (or in close relation to it). Newspapers are examples of secondary sources and considered one of the better types to include in the article (not saying primary sources are bad). If you find that most/all of the references are primary sources, notify the nominator about this issue(s) and place the article on hold once you have completed the review. Only in the event that a secondary source can't be found as a replacement, then the primary source can remain. If there is a good mix of primary and secondary sources, that is perfect and no references need to be changed. Now, reliability. Forums are generally not considered reliable and some blog's may not be reliable either. Newspapers, most sources published by the subject, some blogs, etc. are considered reliable. If you don't know wether the source is reliable, ask for a second opinion. For more info about how to identify wether a reference is reliable or not, visit this article . Finally, one of the more basic things to look for is that every statement in the article has at least one reference! The only case that a statement doesn't need a reference is when it is common sense that the statement is defiantly true and/or in the case where the statement can't be challenged, as per what Wikipedia says, "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source using an inline citation." From the Editor After a long 18 month hiatus, the third volume of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter is here! Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue of the newsletter here or on the editors talk page. Also, Happy Halloween...in advance!!! PLEASE READ: If you do not wish to receive future WikiProject Good Articles newsletter's on your talk page, please remove your self from this list. If you are viewing this newsletter from the WikiProject Good Articles page or on someone else's talk page and want to receive future newsletters on your talk page, please add your name to the list linked above. Contributors to this Issue Dom497 (Editor of this Issue) Did You Know... ... that 2,100 articles have been reviewed during all backlog elimination drives combined? ... that out of 4,055,039 articles on Wikipedia, only 15,846 are good articles? ... that there are currently over 400 video game good articles? Notes ^ As of October 2, 2012 at 19:05 (UTC). ^ Before quick-failing the article, verify that one of the several referencing templates is correctly placed at the bottom of the article. If the template is not placed, try to place it to see if references are displayed. If this proof returns no references, then proceed to quick-failing. Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: Madame X (album) (talk | history | start review) • Gedling Town F.C. (talk | history | start review) • Reggie Barnes (skateboarder) (talk | history | start review) • Exile (American band) (talk | history | start review) • Jude Law (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Louie Caporusso • Northallerton • Patrick Omameh • Task forces: GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013) Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by

]

WikiProject Good Articles - Participant Clean-up (Second Call)

You are reciving this message because you have not added your name to the list of active WikiProject Good Articles participants. Though you may have recived the first message sent out in September, some users may have had that message archived before coming online to read it and therefore never saw it. If you are deeming yourself inactive with the WikiProject please disregard this message as your name will be moved to an "inactive participant" list at the end of the clean-up. If you are still active with the WikiProject, please be sure to include your name on this list. The current deadline to add your name to the list (if you are still active) is November 1, 2012. A third and final message will be sent out during the last week of the clean-up before the deadline. Thank-you.--EdwardsBot

WikiProject Good Articles - Participant Clean-up (Final Call)

You are receiving this message because you have not added your name to the list of active WikiProject Good Articles participants. Though you may have recived the past two messages sent out in September and October, some users may have had that message archived before coming online to read it and therefore never saw it. If you are deeming yourself inactive with the WikiProject please disregard this message as your name will be moved to an "inactive participant" list at the end of the clean-up. If you are still active with the WikiProject, please be sure to include your name on this list. The deadline to add your name to the list (if you are still active) is November 1, 2012. This will be the last message sent out before the deadline which is in 2 days. Thank-you.--EdwardsBot

The GAN Newsletter (November 2012)

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume III, No. 2 – November 2012 For past newsletters click here

In This Issue Request for Comment: An RFC about the Backlog Elimination Drives has been started this month. Go and voice your opinions! Featured editorial: A Matter of Time: The Future of Backlog Elimination Drives Project News: Over 345 unreviewed articles, 13 at reassessment Good Articles of the Month GA Task Forces: A calmed GA community awaiting for an RFC Member News: 223 members of the GA Wikiproject Read this newsletter Single-page Unsubscribe Newsletter delivered by info ) · 3 November 2012

The WikiProject: Good Articles Newsletter (December 2012)

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume III, No. 3 – December 2012 For past newsletters click here

In This Issue Featured editorial: "Drive-By Reviews": A Retrospective About Reviews During Backlog Drives backlog elimination drive is being held now at GAN. Good Articles of the Month: Our picks for November, 150+ promotions. GA Task Forces: Results from the Backlog Elimination RfC Member News: 227 members of WikiProject Good Articles and counting Read this newsletter Single-page Unsubscribe Newsletter delivered by info ) · 3 December 2012

The WikiProject: Good Articles Newsletter (January 2013)

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume IV, No. 1 – January 2013 For past newsletters click here

In This Issue Featured editorial: Hahc21 . Project News: A record, and issue and a future. Good Articles of the Month: See which articles were picked this year of records: 190 articles passed in December! GA Task Forces: Results from the drive Member News: Two crucial users leave the project Read this newsletter Single-page Unsubscribe Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot · 3 January 2012

This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter - February 2013

The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume IV, No. 2 – February 2013 For past newsletters click here

In This Issue Featured editorial: Hahc21 . Project News: Several proposals are currently ongoin at the project, including two requests for comment. Good Articles of the Month: See which articles were picked this year of records: 282 articles passed in January! GA Task Forces: Some minor notes this month Member News: Member news Read this newsletter Single-page Unsubscribe Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot · 12 February 2012

Good Article Nominations Request For Comment

A 'Request For Comment' for Good Article Nominations is currently being held. We are asking that you please take five to ten minutes to review all seven proposals that will affect Good Article Nominations if approved. Full details of each proposal can be found here. Please comment on each proposal (or as many as you can) here. At this time, Proposal 1, 3, and 5 have received full (or close to) support. If you have questions of anything general (not related to one specif proposal), please leave a message under the General discussion thread. Please note that Proposal 2 has been withdrawn and no further comments are needed. Also, please disregard Proposal 9 as it was never an actual proposal.

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with, the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 01:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK RfC

• As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions02:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Gibson GAN?

Hi. I reached Bob Gibson and I'm impressed with its quality, and slightly bummed that it's not a GA. Since you performed most of the work, it's only right that you nominate it. I see you haven't edited in a month, but I hope you return and get Gibson to GA! (We keep track of HoF and other important baseball biographies at User:Muboshgu/Baseball Mountain.) – Muboshgu (talk) 19:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

GAN Backlog Drive will begin in less than 4 days! In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or leave a message on the Backlog Drive talk page. And remember, there are less than 4 days before the drive starts!--EdwardsBot (talk) 03:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply ]

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on December 31, 2013! If you know anyone outside of the WikiProject that may be interested, feel free to invite them to the drive! If you have any questions or want to comment about something regarding the drive, post them here--EdwardsBot (talk) 00:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply ]

March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive

It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives:

• This drive will introduce a new component to it; a point system. In a nutshell, older nominations are worth more points than newer nominations. The top 3 participants who have the points will be awarded the Golden, Silver, or Bronze Wikipedia Puzzle Piece Trophy, respectively.
• Unlike the December 2013 Backlog Drive, earning an additional barnstar if you reached your goal has been removed.
• The allowance to have insufficient reviews has been lowered to 2 before being disqualified.
• An exception to the rule that all reviews must be completed before the deadline has been created.

Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish.

More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the

the drive page

. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page.

I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone!

--Dom497

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GAN March 2014 Backlog Drive

The

March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

WikiProject Good articles Future GAN Backlog Drive

Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer!

TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page.

If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you.

At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog.

As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate!

Sent by Dom497--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Cup

Hello everyone! We hope you have all been having a great summer!

As we all know, the recent GAN Backlog Drives have not had any big impact on the backlog. Because of that, me (Dom497), Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor have worked on an idea that could possibly finally put a dent into the massive backlog. Now, I will admit, the idea isn't entirely ours as we have took the general idea of the WikiCup and brought it over to WikiProject Good Articles. But anyways, here's what we have in mind:

For all of you that do not know what the WikiCup is, it is an annual competition between several editors to see who can get the most Good Articles, Featured Article's, Did You Know's, etc. Based of this, we propose to you the GA Cup. This competition will only focus on reviewing Good articles.

For more info on the proposal, click here. As a FYI, the proposal page is not what the final product will look like (if you do go ahead with this idea). It will look very similar to WikiCup's page(s).

The discussion for the proposal will take place here. Please let us know if you are interested, have any concerns, things to consider, etc.

--Dom497, Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles - GA Cup

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup WikiProject Good articles is holding a new competition, the Good article nominations ; for each review, points will be awarded with bonuses for older nominations, longer articles and comprehensive reviews. All participants will start off in one group and the highest scoring participants will go through to the second round. At the moment six rounds are planned, but this may change based on participant numbers. Some of you may ask: what is the purpose for a competition of this type? Currently, there is a backlog of about 500 unreviewed Good article nominations, almost an all time high. It is our hope that we can decrease the backlog in a fun way, through friendly competition. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors! Sign-ups will be open until October 15, 2014 so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the four judges. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply] To receive future GA Cup newsletter, please add your name to our mailing list .

Precious

baseball players
Thank you, user "passionate about the Cardinals" and quoted by a US president, for quality articles on baseball players such as Stan Musial and Ozzie Smith, for project work and GA reviews, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1097 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I very much appreciate the recognition, thank you! Monowi (talk) 16:37, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom Elections 2016

: Voting now open!

Hello, Monowi. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ozzie Smith statue part.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Monowi. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article drive notice

March 2021 GAN Backlog Drive begins on March 1, and will continue until the end of the month. Please sign up to review articles and help reduce the backlog of nominations!

This message has been sent to users signed up for the Good articles newsletter. Add or remove your name from the list to subscribe or unsubscribe from future updates. Alternatively, to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

-- For the drive co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Crackers the Corporate Crime Fighting Chicken for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crackers the Corporate Crime Fighting Chicken is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crackers the Corporate Crime Fighting Chicken until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

--Animalparty! (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The 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 2021 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here !

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]