This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
A running total of claims can be seen
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
01:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
WP:FS
Have you poked through the recommended sources yet? Alternatively, consider making a field recording. I got a field recording of my cat to Featured sound with little more than her cooperation and a good-quality desktop microphone. Adam Cuerden(talk) 14:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I can't help you with Video, but for audio, the easiest way is to use Audacity, a free sound editing program, load up the file, then choose "Export as Ogg Vorbis" in the File menu. Adam Cuerden(talk) 14:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
FLC for Huskies of Honor
Hi Tony, hope you are doing well. I currently have a featured list candidacy open for Huskies of Honor, essentially a Hall of Fame for the best men's and women's basketball players in Connecticut Huskies history. I thought you might be interested in taking a look at it; if so, please leave any comments you have here. If not, no worries. –Grondemar 23:02, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Number of four awards
I ran a small script on Wikipedia:Four Award/Records to count how often File:Four Award.svg appears, and I came up with 184. Discounting the first instance at the top, that should leave 183, not 182. Are you sure there's not something missing somewhere? --Gyrobo (talk) 16:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Never mind, I just realized I forgot to subtract one from the length. --Gyrobo (talk) 16:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually, ignore my retraction. Here's the script:
var k = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < (document.images).length; i++) {
if (document.images[i].src == "http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Four_Award.svg/20px-Four_Award.svg.png") {
k++;
}
}
k--; // Take initial header image into account.
alert("Number of FOUR awards: " + k);
It shouldn't matter if it's length or length - 1, it only counts instances of that image. --Gyrobo (talk) 17:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Recently listed good articles/
Port of Miami Tunnel
I see that you have a lot of good, featured and other articles linked on your page, including the
Port of Miami Tunnel, which I basically "took over" recently and have radically changed it over the past few weeks, even today. Over the past few months and a ton in the last week I've been improving the POM Tunnel article and I nominated it as a good article, and it easily passed with basic little changes, and now I don't see how it falls that short of meeting FAC, except for it's length. But I mean, it's not even one year out of four into construction and look how comprehensive of an article I was able to pull together on it. Even since it passing the GAN I've added a substantial amount to it. Daniel Christensen (talk
) 21:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh.... I thought you'd contributed to it in the past, but no, I just realized your page linked to it and made an assumption. So do your user and talk pages automatically display recent GA's? Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for 2010–11 Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey team
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi, I put some new alt suggestions on the DYK talk page in response to your question. Best, Yoninah (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Tony, the hook was moved to Prep 4 and revised by another editor. You can comment on the new hook here. Yoninah (talk) 23:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
File
The Fireside chat isn't going to clean up very much - that sort of static tends not to clean that well. The Peace Corps one I kind of did earlier today. Should've saved that. Still, it's not really worth duplicating work.
HAve a listen, and then we'll talk. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 18:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I mean I should have saved it for you - it's already in the nom. =/ Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Click at the point you wwant to start selecting, hold the mouse button down, and drag to the end of the selection before releasing. Adam Cuerden(talk) 23:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
You're trying a bit too hard to remove static at the beginning, leading to ruining the rest of the speech. Try blending in a bit more of the original. Adam Cuerden(talk) 08:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikivoices/Episode_48
- Just use part 2 of this; there's no particularly noticeable clicking.
Cleaning up a sound file should not make it harder to listen to - the current version distorts the voice so much that it'svery hard to make out the words. Harder than in the original. Adam Cuerden(talk) 08:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden(talk) 08:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
When you nominate a file don't forget to add {{FSC|Name of subpage (without Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/}} It's great to see you eager to participate, consider commenting on other nominations as well :) Regards, —
DYK for List of Football Academic All-America Team Members of the Year
nominate
) 08:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for List of Women's Basketball Academic All-America Team Members of the Year
nominate
) 08:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for List of Men's Basketball Academic All-America Team Members of the Year
nominate
) 08:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
talkback
Hello, TonyTheTiger. You have new messages at Tvoz's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
P.S. Sorry it took me so long to get this to you. I had an emergency halfway through the promotion.
You've got mail
Hello, TonyTheTiger. 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 {{
Talk
) • 3:28pm • 05:28, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to join Wikimedia US/WALRUS mailing list
Since you started the discussion I consider you a co-nominator--Guerillero | My Talk | Review Me 16:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Infoboxes
Hi. I encountered a surprising opposition yesterday to the St. Petersburg pin map I made and the infobox I added to Winter Palace showing city location. The reverter seems to have a load of people who are against infoboxes and supported him. I've opened a discussion, I was under the impression that infoboxes are generally preferred on here given that they are used in most articles. I think there should be a general consensus made either way which stops people re,oving or adding infoboxes based on personal preferences but based on those which adequately reflect the mainstream view. Are infoboxes generally accepted on wikipedia?, I need some feedback at the pump on this as obviously if I had believed there wasn't I a] would not have added an infobox b] I wouldn't have created a map and c] I wouldn't have asked the reverter not to remove the infobox.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Thankyou for taking to time to comment. It just struck me as odd as I've honestly never seen a group express their distaste for infoboxes except the opera project with composers.Generally if you add infoboxes to articles you don't anticipate it being reverted!! City maps are my thing, so I thought a city locator in the article would be useful like I did with Chicago.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Worked heavily on improving this today and finding new sources, copy editing, making concise, filling in refs to nominate for GA. See
this. My hours of work completely reverted. Is this acceptable? I'm going to take some time away from here right now but can you seriously look into this revert and bring proper justice to this situation. I as you know am an experienced GA contributor but this sort of hostitlity has sickened me to the core.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:34, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Blofeld on this - there was no reason for a wholesale revert without any attempt at mollifying the situation. I have reverted the revert - something I don't do lightly - because I think it was unwarranted. I'm going to suggest that the issue be taken up on the article talkpage, unless you think otherwise. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Sure. It may have to wait until tonight. (I did a bit of a fly-by on the Winter Palace article, admittedly - I didn't read everything, just enough to satisfy myself that my revert could be justified.)
I've seen you around some - I lurk over at WP:FPC from time to time, and I've seen you come up in the newpage patrol. I've become mostly a gnome, myself, with periods of active article creation. But I tend to fly under the radar a lot - I don't go over to WP:FA or WP:GA hardly at all (been meaning to change that, though - I simply don't have the time to work something up to a decent standard any more), and tend to live in article space.
OK nobody has a right to remove GA noms like this, That is NOT debatable. This guy needs sorting out.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually, it is debatable. You nominated it, then posted a wikibreak notice. He's the main contributor. You may not agree with his actions, but you can't argue that it's not arguable. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
WP vs. Commons
Long story short, I can't support commons because I feel it supports and protects racist trolls. If you need to move a copy to Commons, feel free; just put a {{
Keep Local
}} on the original, since I also don't trust Commons' occasional deletion sprees.
I don't think this one has any chance of passing; if you agree with that analysis, do you think you could withdraw it? It'll cut down the number of nominations a bit. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 21:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Is it possible to use edited audio on this? If you give me the synced audio track - you have my e-mail, I think - I'll send you one with the background noise removed. As it is, there's so much noise that it's hard to support.
By the way, please use the best possible sound settings on all your videos; this is, after all, featured sounds, so the sound quality is much more important than video. Adam Cuerden(talk) 17:15, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
FSCs
They're not short videos, Tony, and I do need to listen in full before voting. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:13, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Long videos
Have you considered dividing them into a few parts, to get around the 100 mb limit? Adam Cuerden(talk)
Well, play it by ear. These may not divide up well, but if you had a recording of an opera, say, then you might well want to divide it more. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 00:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Amazing Grace
I would suggest taking a break from that discussion, you seem to be getting overly worked-up. Saying that someone lacks sophistication and is a "hater", no matter how you may disagree with them, qualifies as a personal attack and is unhelpful in constructive conversation. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:17, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Yours were the most blatant PAs on the page, unless I'm overlooking something; do you have diffs for someone else saying something comparable? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
That one's about equal to "gibberish", not as bad as "hater". Subjective quantifications aside, do you really think "she started it" is a good reason to start making blatant attacks? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:52, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, Tony, would you mind withdrawing these for, say, a week or so, then renominating? These were part of the big batch, and seem to have been completely neglected, but I think they'd likely pass on a fresh nomination. Alternatively, we could leave it a bit longer and see if they attract people. Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, I have no objection to leaving them open, or relisting. It's just that the FS directors are also regular voters. If it was closed, it'd be a voluntary action on your part, not a statement that it shouldn't pass. I'm just wondering if spacing out the big batch a bit more would speed up promotion of the ones that do have votes. Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:44, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
If those stars were physical, and you melted them all down, you could smelt yourself a life sized statue by now.
Wha?
20:55, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Amazing Grace
The entire nomination is nothing but discussion about how difficult it is t get things into the articles; I don't see anything needing to be kept for when the debate finishes. =) Adam Cuerden(talk) 01:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Your welcome. Hyacinth (talk) 03:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't know much about band music. The book under further reading says the pieces in it are arranged for "SNARE DRUMS, TRIOS, CYMBALS, AND TUNED BASS DRUMS." Marching band#Instrumentation lists "snare drums, tenor drums, bass drums, and cymbals" so that seems to be standard. Hyacinth (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louie Caporusso until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Geofth (talk) 18:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Tony, I've left a comment for you on Talk:Gunfight at the O.K. Corral/GA1. I'm trying to understand what about that article was so bad that it required a quickfail for citations. There are more than 100 citations in that article, and it's well written and meets all the GA criteria as listed. I'd very much appreciate if you could help me see what the issue was there. In a culture where Wikipedia is losing contributors daily, it's really important that we treat each other with respect and and recognize high quality work for what it is. There's no reason, to my mind, that this article deserved not only to be promoted to G.A., but particularly deserved a serious discussion of its merits. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
GA Delisting and Quickfail
This is about why editors don't contribute or quit. As an editor, I am someplace in the middle: a regular contributor (10K+ edits over 4+ years) but not totally devoted to WP. I have recently been taken with
WP:RS a couple of months ago. Articles about Wyatt Earp are present on many language versions of WP. I could not believe that the article about such a key figure in American pioneer history was so bad. I've worked diligently to become familiar with the many, complex sides of this historical figure, not a trivial task. I finally thought it was ready for GA, and to my surprise Wyatt Earp was readily approved by one editor, and then almost immediately delisted by you. You also quickfailedGunfight at the O.K. Corral
because it was missing citations.
I confess I was discouraged by the delisting and quickfail without the opportunity to immediately fix the article. You are a senior admin and huge contributor to WP (
good faith
. I hope I'm not whining.
I know WP has suffered from a loss of editors. I personally know two experienced Admins who have
retired
due to abuse by other admins. I suggest you:
take a couple more seconds to think about other's contributions, especially those of us who are in the middle, before you hit the button and delist, etc.
take a minute to educate and assist.
take some time to educate other admins to take a bit more care in helping editors along.
amend the standard of
good faith
to those who've been around a bit longer.
IMO, it's not the number of edits or GA articles that necessarily make an editor #1 on WP. It's about helping others to make better contributions.
Sorry for having reverted your addition of sound files to the article. They are nice, but they are not chamber music, nor were they particularly relevant to the discussion where you included them. The section is about music after Debussy.
I suggest you add them to the article on Orchestra. They certainly are good examples of new orchestration techniques used by the impressionist composers (the use of the harp, for example).
Regards, --Ravpapa (talk) 06:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Regarding Image:Seized Website image.png, no, I don't think you created that image. However, it is a work of the Federal Government, so it's free from copyright via a different template, namely Template:PD-USGov-DOJ. -- Kendrick7talk 07:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
FWIW, I'm not sure what to make of your commented out mention of me on DYK. While I've been annoyed in the past to get over looked in the whole creator/expander dynamic (I used to stub out many an article), I honestly don't want any credit on this one; let's just say I happen to have a lot of extra free time on my hands when sitting in front of the computer lately. So, thanks, I guess, but still, may the good Lord help me if I get too sucked into the project again ;) -- Kendrick7talk 06:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Sunflower Slow Drag
I kind of wish you hadn't withdrawn this so fast: It's uncontroversial that ragtime was regularly performed by small bands at the time, and this could've served as an example of that; e.g. "not too many, but we could use a couple." Adam Cuerden(talk) 19:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Chartered Financial Analyst
Hey TonyTheTiger,
It turns out that my proposal for Chartered Financial Analyst page was not approved by my class instructor because it was irrelevant to the class and especially the "Copyleft" group that I was assigned to. My new proposal is to create a new article page about "Copyfree" which is originated as a play on the terms "Copyleft" and "Copyright". I am not sure the article exists on wikipedia althought i could not find it. I would like to compare Copyleft and Copyfree in terms of definition, popularity, uses and other aspects on the wiki page.
This semester is coming to an end and I will definitely make substantial positive contributions in the following one or two weeks.
, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Guerillero | My Talk 23:15, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Struck out per DTTR. Its still up for CSD but its a house keeping sort of thing --Guerillero | My Talk 23:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Gery Chico GAR
The GAR for Gery Chico seems to be taking a rather long time. Do you think I should withdraw it and send the article back to GAN? Or should I just wait at GAR? Geread (talk) 13:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Tony the T. Thanks for finding and uploading a soundfile to the Grainger article. It will take a while to get that article into shape, but yours is a good contribution. Brianboulton (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. The plot should not contain production information, such as the info about the music stands. Other productions might use electronic screens, or the actresses might be "off book". That is why I put the music stands above in the history section above. The black clothing could be mentioned though, as it seems to be part of the script. Three refs is excessive, though. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:14, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. The Plot section also should not refer to any particular production (you refer to Off-Broadway). That info should go above, with the production history: It's not "plot". Would you please move it up? All the best. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:22, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I think that makes more sense and helps to organize the information being presented. I hope you are satisfied with it, and I don't want you to be unhappy with the presentation, so it is up to you - if you really disagree, feel free to present it as you think best. I'm really more concerned with how the musicals are presented, where we have a pretty consistent style and have reflected that in our guidelines. I don't usually work on non-musical plays, which are under the jurisdiction of the Theatre project, which has historically had little central planning. It seems to be more active now, which is great. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011
India pilot being organized now - Plans are currently underway for a pilot expansion of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – in India! Hisham Mundol and other Wikimedia staff have begun recruiting Campus Ambassador candidates for Pune.
Document DYK, peer review and other milestone at the trophy case - If students you are working with (or any others you notice) are doing work that makes to DYK, is nominated for Good Article status, or is just solid content worth marking, then please help us document the students' success at the trophy case.
Changes to mailing list - A new low-volume mailing list, [Ambassador-announce-l], is being created. It will be reserved for key announcements and news, which we'd like all ambassadors to be subscribed to.
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading all those U. S. military music recordings, especially the British Grenadiers. I've been uploading some as well on seeing that (I'm guessing you skipped Jack Tar since the Navy website didn't mention it's by Souza and from the 1900s). This one is copyright in its source country, the U.K., until 2016, but not in the U.S., so it should be on Wikipedia, tagged with {{PD-US-1923-abroad|2016}}; I can upload but not download ogg files. 22:42, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Jack Tar I uploaded to Commons; can you move Colonel Bogey? —innotata 15:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
No, can you upload a copy to Wikipedia, with the tag I mentioned: it needs to be deleted on Commons. —innotata 15:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Jack Tar is at File:Jack Tar March.ogg (search shows it now). I see you've moved Colonel Bogey. —innotata 15:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Re: WP:LEAD
Can you quote me back where
WP:LEAD says what you think it says, regarding bolding to be united in the first para? I couldn't find it -- Kendrick7talk
06:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Furthermore, if I could find it, I'd change it, because it's obviously a brain-dead requirement. -- Kendrick7talk 06:44, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree with that, but it goes on to specify "These may include alternative spellings, longer or shorter forms, historical names, significant names in other languages, etc." I agree (although I'll usually footnote such things rather than clutter the lead). That's not at all what is at issue here, imo. Compare, say, my work at
WP:LEAD here is addressing a totally different matter than merely bolded titles of related issues merged into the same article. -- Kendrick7talk
06:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Clinton/Lewinksy FS
Hi, thinking of displaying it at F and A this week, but is there any way of removing the little brown rectangle bottom-left? Tony(talk) 09:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Your comments
Your post makes no sense. If my purpose is to get the article to FA, then whether the GA process is easy or hard is irrelevant, because the plus is lost if the star is gained, and FA reviewers are not undemanding. I think we both know the answer lies elsewhere. Please be guided accordingly in future.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
In the interests of settling a distracting matter, if you are willing to keep out of this and my articles henceforth, I will not raise an objection if you summarily promote as reviewer on the second nomination. That includes all levels of review. I will enter into the same understanding. You need only respond by taking the action suggested; I do not have this page watchlisted and will not be returning here any time soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Tony. As you may have noticed on your watchlist the long awaited merger of infobox skyscraper is finally happening so you may wish to add the pin maps you wanted now. Hopefully we can get shot of the decimal coordinates and map type and make them standard pushpin and DMS. The plan is also to merge infobox hotel and infobox casino, although I'm hoping to keep the suitable header colors.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, TonyTheTiger. In the above image, the licensing tag indicates that the image is free, but the image also includes a non-free use rationale for the image. Can you clarify on the image's copyright status? If the license does not permit commercial reuse and derivative works, the image is not considered free. SwarmX 09:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Talk page
Would you mind avoiding my talk page unless there is great need? While I did not actually read your posts, from the edit summaries I am gathering these are not matters of urgency, and perhaps would be best deferred or not sent at all. You can't be asking me to undertake an administrative task, so that can't be it. There likely will come a time when I am more willing to engage with you, but I think posting to my talk page at present is just escalating matters. No need for a reply, unless it makes you feel better.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:22, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Main page appearance
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 May 1, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 1, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk·contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. 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* ۩۞ 20:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Dear Tony The Tiger: I've nominated the article Daniel Coughlin for Good Article status. Would you consider reviewing it? Also, I also nominated it for a DYK note,and it looks like that DYK will appear in the next few days. Finally, a more general wikipedia question. The article has been tagged as part of three wiki projects: Chicago, Biography, and Catholicism. As you know, the quality for Chicago was changed from stub to B. However, no one in the other groups has taken a look. Is it true that once the quality (not the importance) has been assessed by one group, an editor can assign that same quality level to other projects, or do I have to wait until someone from each group takes a look. Thanks for the help! NearTheZoo (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Semper Fidelis (march)
nominate
) 12:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
David Fedderly
I've reorganized David Fedderly (using better sources) since you voted "Neutral leaning delete" at the AfD. Have I improved it enough to lean you the other way? - Pointillist (talk) 01:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions
), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.
This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to
In The News
. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!
Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen
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
An article that you have recently reviewed for GA, April 2011 Fukushima earthquake, has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 03:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. 
Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
