This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cwmhiraeth. 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 a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Sven Manguard (submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place Casliber (submissions) and second place Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.
The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.
A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. 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 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) 16:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Mycale laevis
On 9 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mycale laevis, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the orange icing sponge often grows on the underside of the mustard hill coral? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 9 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Porites astreoides, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the orange icing sponge often grows on the underside of the mustard hill coral? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
wildlife
Thank you for raising our awareness for wildlife, plants and animals that we would overlook, supplying not only great articles but also inventive and imaginative news about them, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
Hi, see you've greatly improved the 'Threats' text. You've also used the Echinoblog... prob. not a reliable source. We can see that Mah knows his stuff; I already used him to locate sources on toxins -very helpful- but I doubt we can use him directly; if we cite him at all, suggest it should be supported by direct refs to toxicology papers, etc. And probably every sentence needs a ref, too. Just my tuppence worth. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:37, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Actually, despite his schoolboy-like appearance, Christopher Mah is a respected researcher on echinoderms with many published papers and I would argue that the Echinoblog is a reliable source. He is also the authority on starfish used by WoRMS. Nevertheless, I can no doubt find other references for the facts I gave. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm working on Thomas Pennant's correspondent Gilbert White's The Natural History of Selborne, which I feel is getting close to being ready for GA ... as probably Pennant is - I'd be happy to help shepherd it through, if you'd like that? I'm not sure if you want help on, er, xeric habitats, but if you do (Human relations?) then I can give it a go. I've more or less run out of steam on Starfish unless you have any ideas on that, too. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I was thinking that Thomas Pennant was about ready for GA but haven't actually looked at it since we started on Sea. Theoretically, the results of the Core Competition are due in about a week, but they have always been late in the past. There may be some useful ideas as to if or how the article needs to be developed so I propose we discuss its future when the Core Competition is concluded. As to my present dry assignment, I am enjoying taking it at my leisure but if you care to do the human face of it, you are welcome. I plan to look at Starfish tonight and will comment on how its getting on, on the talk page. Little Jerry and I are currently involved in an FA of Manta Ray which I expect will conclude soon. Though I did a lot of work on it before we nominated it, it was his original idea and he has mostly been shepherding it along. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Good. I've added some quotes from Richard Mabey's wonderful biography of White to Pennant. I'll leave you to your droughtiness unless a fit takes me back to it, perhaps T.E. Lawrence, Doughty and Thesiger will induce me... it would be a mighty section and a fair bit of work, feel free to ask if you think I'm needed. Will have a go at polishing Starfish. Would love anything you have to say about Selborne. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:54, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I will bear your offer in mind, - it was not a section I had even considered. I will have a look at Selborne. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
I read through Selborne and made a couple of trivial changes. Perhaps the article should include a bit more information on the Antiquaries second volume? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Just had a look at Desert - coming on really well! But too many images have accreted (in a dune?) on the leeward side of the text... If any suggestion is needed, I'd say the Rub' al Khali shd be at the top, alone, with |upright=1.5|; the "Largest non-polar deserts" should be down in Geography near the list of top 10 deserts; that Flora shd have just one or two obviously cactus-y images (Saguaro), leave out the dead tree etc; and generally chuck the rest of the images (out, or into a gallery at the end, or something). Hope this isn't bad news. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I haven't yet done much with the images and will probably leave them mostly till I have finished the text. Too many scenic dunes at the moment. I am fortunate in that nobody else seems to "own" the article and want to get into dispute about what I am doing. Sea scored me 74 points at DYK. It had a 7.2 multiplier for being on about 180 different language wikipedias and scored a bonus of 2 points because it was previously classified as a stub! The multiplier will also provide worthwhile scores if it attains GA or FA. Thomas Pennant has a 1.4 multiplier and should score 42 points if it attains GA. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Amazing! I'm working on Gilbert White and Thomas Bewick, having finished drafting articles on their books (White's now in the GA queue), and have dropped bits into Thomas Pennant when I kept on coming across them while reading about White. Happily nobody seems to 'own' them, either -- it's nice not to have to fight, but some critical discussion would be useful actually, as it's hard to crit. one's own work until a few months later, I find. Happy to do more on Pennant as I mentioned, then we'll have a set of Nat. Hist. authors in a good state. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
On 20 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hediste diversicolor, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the ragworm changes colour from brown to green as the breeding season approaches? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hediste diversicolor. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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've reprocessed Desert features - either rewritten, removed, or marked as citation needed: not all was USGS. Have added some refs, more needed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:04, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello again, I've had a go at rationalizing the images - layout, choice, number, and hope you like the result. Have put a proposal for the section structure on the talk page. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
The images look good. Later the lead section will need to be rewritten and it will be nice to use the large white blank space to the right of the contents box for one or more further images, maybe a rocky desert or stony desert. Have you seen any good images of desert pavements? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
It's a bit rough for what I had in mind. I'm really looking for a smooth flat expanse of desert surfaced by small pebbles that look as if they were part of a mosaic. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:28, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Done. Also fixed the dreadful copyvio in Minerals. I'm not sure if the human life in deserts is also a cv or whether other sites have mirrored us. Whichever it is, it needs citations, and I think that will mean a total rewrite from its current POV / OR state. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Aha.. Materialscientist just told me, re the above, "just to remind you that USGS is a public domain source (US Government) and may be copied, just needs proper reference and mentioning of copying." ... to which I replied "Oh I see. Well, I've reffed and rewritten it now - at least it feels a bit more Wikipacious. But thanks for letting me know." Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, I did wonder about that when I wrote "I take it that this is a copyright violation" on your talkpage. I looked around the USGS site but could find no reference to its copyright status but you seem to imply that any US government publication is usable. I think the material is better rewritten, I don't much like the idea of copying things verbatim and then trying to claim I've written a good article! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think that must be the truth of it. Like the EB 1911, it's free to use but frankly hopeless as the text of an article, and it should be acknowledged, which it wasn't. Much better rewritten. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok, have written short sections on literature and war. Huge subjects. I think the article is pretty much ready for GA now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I have added the Uwe George book that inspired me to work on this subject in the first place, - most interesting reading. GA scheduled for the end of next month. I'll get on with nominating Thomas Pennant for now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh good. Where are you putting him? As you know I've found the Biology... queue slow; Pennant (like Thomas Bewick) could go there or in Lit. I suppose... any idea of pros and cons? Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm trying Biology and Medicine. There are 14 nominations there at the moment (2 being reviewed) and I will endeavour to decrease the number by taking on one. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
The reference is to a 1986 news article and, even if the practice is widespread and has continued long since then, it would be wrong to imply it was still in force without further evidence. So I think the date 1986 should be mentioned in the article, but you can express it in a different way if you choose. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Two small points that interested me in connection with the contents of the book. My brilliant FA Common toad ;-), explains that the toad is nocturnal and will snap at anything of an appropriate size that it sees moving, even the researcher's scrap of black material. So using the toad to test for Batesian mimicry was not ideal. Also in the toad article, it explains how some predatory birds disembowel the toad and feed on its interior rather than consume the toxins in its skin. So the statement " the great horned owl is known to prey on the skunk, showing that even such a disagreeably pungent animal can be subject to predation" does not amount to much either. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:21, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks for the review. Yes, these are reasons why with 20/20 hindsight we can see that Darwin and Bates were right, their critics wrong. Beddard did his best but does look much too skeptical of Darwin today. Poulton clung on for dear life while neo-Lamarckism did its thing. Darwin himself was rightly worried that there was no known mechanism for discrete (non-blending) inheritance; if only he'd heard of Mendel's paper. It took until the 1920s for the theory to right itself (like a lifeboat, it pretty much did a 360 deg. roll...) and for biologists to see things very differently. I hope the article says that in other people's words! What d'you think? Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:20, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Blackcurrant may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
half tonne bins and to minimise stoppage time, some machines have [Conveyor system|cross conveyors]] which direct the fruit into continuously moving trailers in the adjoining row. A modern machine
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
When I add comments to a review page, on the editing page I try to leave a blank line between comment threads. This makes it easier to distinguish different threads from each other when editing the page. Would you consider doing this please? You would need to add an extra carriage return after your comment rather than just typing in the existing blank line between threads. Thanks. Axl¤[Talk]08:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members).
So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (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 (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), 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)
On 12 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Molgula oculata, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the tadpolelarva of the sea grape Molgula oculata can swim but the larva of Molgula occulta has no tail and cannot? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 12 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Molgula occulta, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the tadpolelarva of the sea grape Molgula oculata can swim but the larva of Molgula occulta has no tail and cannot? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 12 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cynarina, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the solitary cup coral can double its diameter by drawing water into its mantle? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cynarina. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Atlantic Puffin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St Kilda (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.
I was in a similar position with Eurasian Blackcap, where I also had a 120-page book. That topped out at 152k, as compared with your current 146k. Tern was 205k, but that's a family article. I don't think you need to worry just yet, you can trim and reorganise when you have all the data in. I didn't see much where I thought you were going into too much detail, although I'd be cautious about local conservation efforts (how many are there?), and, at present, some material, like feeding, is spread over several sections and could probably be rationalised a bit Jimfbleak - talk to me?10:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
I imagine that you have plenty of material, but I have access to JSTOR (only) if you need to see full text for one of their abstracts. I bet you don't have a music section (: Jimfbleak - talk to me?12:09, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, I'll keep that in mind. Puffin's vocalisations are limited and unmusical - Mozart wouldn't have been impressed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anatomy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epidermis (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.
D'you know what, I think it's mad to cover plants in the anatomy article. Sure, motorcycles have anatomy of a sort, but there's nothing in common between the structure of plants and animals. I suggest we just say something along the general lines of "Plant anatomy is the study of the internal structure of plants; plant morphology studies their external structure. The two together are roughly analogous to the study of the anatomy of animals." and leave it at that. It's barmy to start again. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:27, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
And, um, I think trying to cover, er, insects, er, crustaceans, er, the whole arthropod phylum, er, starfish, er, everything else... is even madder. Again, let's just put in one sentence saying "anatomy as generally understood is a medical or veterinary term, covering the body structures of vertebrates" ... mumble something about homology .. mutter something rapidly about all other organisms obviously having structure too, and stop. Really. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:31, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
A splendid new history section, just what I was looking for! I agree with you about plant anatomy and invertebrate anatomy, but I was trying to fill the pre-existing sections as I thought it was the "will of the people". I'll add in the bits I have in my userspace and we'll see what the article looks like. Its already long enough for DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Oh good. I've had a hunt thro' the history, and it seems the wish for plants, as for broadening things from human/mammal anatomy, is purely down to Jarble - who has added nothing except a few headings and the tag. So I think we can cut the scope down to something sensible without too many pangs. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
You can see what I have done now. I plan to write a section on each of reptiles, amphibians and mammals similar to the ones I have already done for fish and birds. Shall we get rid of plant anatomy and insect anatomy entirely? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, why not. Plant morphology/anatomy doesn't mention animals at all, and 99.9% of all known medics think even mentioning primate anatomy is a bit academic... Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Animal anatomy
I'd say once you've filled in the remaining section, it's DYK-ready, and well on the way beyond that.
The 'Animal anatomy' navbox at the end is grimly misnamed - I've put a note on its talk page. I guess someone muddled animal and mammal. The navbox links to "Animal anatomy", which - you guessed - redirects to the section of that name in Anatomy. ("While animals generally have four legs to run around on, jellyfish have tentacles that they don't run on, and sponges have no legs at all and don't even fall over when they've drunk a lot.") Yeah. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
And sponges can be passed through a fine sieve and reform into an organism on the other side. I've nominated the article for DYK, moved some sections around and plan to take it to GA later. Meanwhile I am slightly enlarging the animal subsections and will do something better with the invertebrates. Do you think the Human anatomy section should be renamed? It does not fit in well where it currently is. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:40, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Fantastic effort. Agree on the H.A. section. I've been awfully bold and promoted humans out of their taxonomic slot, as Human Anatomy is unlike the other sections in being all about Research and Practice - so I've made that a subsection and added a new one on Structure (just a list right now, possibly needs refs) with Main links to the Outline and Human body articles - it's actually a mess with multiple overlaps and gaps. I've also added a few lines of overview for the Vertebrates as the section just went straight down to group (Class) level with nothing at the top - so we need a couple of citations there too. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Good work! Thanks for all your help on this article, I'm glad I drew you away from your usual fields of camouflage, coloration, biologists and their books. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes. I think I've retired from cam and colour as essentially done ... unless anyone brave and knowledgeable wants to help get something to FA of course. 'Of the making of books there is no end', but I've similarly brought to GA the ones I was aiming to cover, so right now I'm writing rather than reading... who knows where it'll lead! - Very happy to join in collaborations, it's productive, and it's amazing how scrappy the top 1,000 'vital articles' are. They should all be GA at least, and some of them are basically Start-class. Now if 100 editors each did 10 articles ... Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Well if you have any suggestions for interesting core articles that we could work on together to improve, let me know. As you will have gathered, I favour articles that appear in multiple language Wikipedias. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:33, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Looking at Anatomy again, I'm not sure I understand why there's a sizeable chunk on Animal tissues; it feels out of place (and indeed the next section, Human anatomy, seems more like the place to start). Not sure why you've done so much on Reptiles either - will the other classes be similarly extended? Could be too much; I rather feel the Human anatomy should be about (at least?) half the article, what do you think the balance should be? Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:52, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I could have called it tissues rather than animal tissues and it comes under the heading of microscopic anatomy mentioned in the lead. As for the reptiles, there are five orders and three of amphibians whereas the mammals and birds have less diversity. Also I realised that the article was a bit short for the fivefold DYK expansion. It can be trimmed down later. I have not really been thinking about the human aspect at all. Any ideas? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 16:07, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, there's basically an infinite supply of material for the H.A. section - Gray's Anatomy... and lots of it is already in the other WP articles, so I'm afraid of duplication - what is really needed is a plan for the whole area, so it's clear how the articles are supposed to fit together. FWIW I think it'd be sensible to include an image of the body dissected down to some level, e.g. all skin removed, abdomen open. That could be labelled with the major systems that are already listed. OK a bit Dorling Kindersley but there it is. I guess the next level would be to extend the brief sentence on each system to a short paragraph; after that it widens out dramatically, probably a no-no.
Hm. I think what's needed is a sense of hierarchy and fitting in. At the mo, we go straight from lead into Tissues, then Human, then all these animals. Something not right there. I'd say we should go lead, Human, hierarchy of body-systems-organs-tissues with section of about equal size on all of those (i.e. my bit on systems, new bit on organs, your bit on tissues). Then into animals, then history. Better, no? Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I've been thinking about it a bit more. I think it short start with an overview section, what anatomy is, what use is made of anatomical data, where it fits in with other disciplines etc. Then we should go Human, hierarchy of body-systems-organs-tissues with section of about equal size on all of those as you suggest. I'll trim down the reptiles and replace the insects with a short invertebrate section. How's that? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:48, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I've added a brief overview introduction. Over at DYK they are arguing as to whether it is a 5x expansion or not. I think it is. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Probably easiest just to add a bit more then, along the lines you've outlined and leave the trimming for later, I've never found them particularly amenable to reasoned argument. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Starfish review
I am not going to finish my review in time. Feel free to start the FAC whenever you feel ready. I can continue my review there if necessary. Axl¤[Talk]20:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Please carry on for the moment, we can discuss how we want to proceed at the end of the month. You have nearly finished the more technical parts. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:38, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
On 28 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Blackspot shark, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the blackspot shark feeds on small fish, crustaceans and squid and is not dangerous to man? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Blackspot shark. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).
So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.
What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.
The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.
Hi Cwmhiraeth, I see you've changed the image. Guess I can tell why, but the image is actually far less characteristic of V. than the other one (there are plenty of good similar ones to choose from). This one, obviously, shows only a skeleton, not an anatomy dissection; it does not have one of the amazing Italianate landscapes in the background; and it is thus highly atypical (being more of a memento mori than anything). FWIW I think we should choose the dissection that takes your fancy - we can have any plate from his book. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:31, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
I changed it because of the DYK nomination and the fact that it is less cluttered and looks better at thumbnail size. I'm happy to revert to a dissection-type image when DYK is out of the way. We could then change to "Andreas Vesalius - Anatomy - WGA25035.jpg" or one of the page number series 174 to 190. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:13, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
WikiCup 2013 June newsletter
We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.
A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 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) 10:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Ping again. I hope I fixed everything, but may have made it worse instead of better. Who knows? But I'll be online about another 2-3 hours, then offline for much of the rest of the week. No worries here if you want to make a couple small tweaks yourself. Montanabw(talk)17:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
I think I fixed that last problem. Let me know, however. And if I get myself blocked for saying "A--hole" over on Eric Corbett's talk page (not about him), feel free to just tweak it yourself! (grinning, ducking and running) Montanabw(talk)19:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Pony!
Congratulations! For your support of Oxbow (horse) at FAC, you have received a pony! Ponies are cute, intelligent, cuddly, friendly (most of the time, though with notable exceptions), promote good will, encourage patience, and enjoy carrots. Treat your pony with respect and he will be your faithful friend! Montanabw(talk)00:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
To send a pony or a treat to other wonderful and responsible editors, click here.
Cwmhiraeth, I wanted to be sure you'd seen the latest review on this. Look forward to seeing your response. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Zostera noltei
On 3 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zostera noltei, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that since wasting disease has become established in dwarf eelgrass and common eelgrass beds, populations of overwintering Brent geese have declined in Europe? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Da iawn yn wir. I am not a native speaker otherwise I would congratulate you in the language of the Gods! Welsh and a natural historian - a perfect combination. I was adding to the DYK when I spotted your contributions. Da boch chi. Rosser Gruffydd 07:44, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Diolch yn fawr. I probably speak Welsh no better than you but chose my editor's name after the village where my daughter lived. "Hiraeth" has such nostalgic connotations. You seem to have emigrated to Scotland! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anaerobic (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.
For your contributions to bring Sea to Good Article status--you deserve ten barnstars for a job like that! Thanks for all you do. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cambarus cryptodytes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chela (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.
Should this now have an approval tick, or is there something holding up a final approval? It looks like the former, but it isn't always the case. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I suppose that's true. Camping in March in Germany taught me that--at -18, even in a down sleeping bag, a night seems to last forever. Anyway, that was a fun read: I learned something new. Thanks for that! Drmies (talk) 19:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Core Contest
The Content Creativity Barnstar
I hereby award this Content Creativity Barnstar to Cwmhiraeth for sharing in winning the Core Contest in April 2013 for amazing work on expanding The Sea. A wikimedia UK person will be in contact to send off an Amazon voucher. Well done! Cas Liber (talk·contribs) 06:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I think neither. It seems to be a term for a bulbous-shaped storage organ, resembling a Roman ampulla I guess. At the moment my computer is a pain, with every web page taking 40 to 60 seconds to load. This restricts what I can efficiently do on Wikipedia and I will have to get it sorted. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
OK, but It's easier said than done. At the moment there are 141 references. I will look at the first 70 and you can look at the rest. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
I think the two sources I noted above and the 1950 source are the only real problems. Especially since their being used for more general facts. LittleJerry (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
I've just done a 1953 one and the 1925 one. I have retained the 1935 one and explained why on the FAC page. I'm stopping for the night now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
It seems we have come across some cases where the sources didn't support the text. Are these leftovers from before you worked on the article? LittleJerry (talk) 03:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
I will look into them. There may be places in the article where there was no reference and I searched for something suitable but it did not fully cover the topic. I must say that I am not now impressed by the work I did on this article before the GA last year. On further inspection, this part was my own and sentences may have been moved around so that the reference got attached to the wrong bit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
The World Register of Marine Species articles do not give the number of genera and species. I know the reader can click on the families then genera and count from there but is it appropriate? LittleJerry (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Different sources give different figures for the number of genera and species. In order to be consistent I used WoRMS and counted up the genera and species. I think if anyone wants to check the figures, they can do the same. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
On 26 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anatomy, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the modern study of human anatomy is considered to have been founded by Andreas Vesalius(anatomical drawing pictured) in the sixteenth century? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anatomy. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 27 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Badger flea, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when separated from its host, the badger flea jumps repeatedly in an effort to reconnect? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Badger flea. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Thomas Pennant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber(talk)14:37, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.
Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Puffin eggs
If you really want a picture, Seebohm's Coloured figures of the eggs of British birds has two life-sized images ob plate 26. It's out of copyright and free to download Jimfbleak - talk to me?06:11, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
As the egg is described as oval and white, I was thinking an image would not add a lot to the article. An image of the bird swimming underwater with its wings would be a lot more valuable. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:16, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
User Talk:FunkMonk
Hello, Cwmhiraeth. You have new messages at FunkMonk's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Brilliant. That would have taken me hours and hours to try to figure out and I would probably have failed in the end. Two things I notice that are not quite right:
The Tuffed Puffin & Rhinoceros Auklet are not displaying as they should be.
The word Alcidae should be one place to the right. The red-billed gull and redwinged pratincole are not part of the family Alcidae and in fact, I think they should be omitted from the cladogram which would then consist purely of the family Alcidae. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:24, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
That looks fine, thank you for your effort. Yes, it can be added to the article to replace the image that's there at the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:10, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rufous-tailed Scrub Robin may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
Sometimes the Rufous-tailed Bush Robin is found in association with a [[Woodchat Shrike]] {''Lanius senator''), perhaps nesting in a neighbouring tree. The Woodchat Shrike perches near the top of a tree, ever
Namibia to central Natal.<ref name=Fishbase/> Although fairly common off the coast of South Africa]] it occurs less frequently and in deeper waters in the more tropical parts of its range in Namibia
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rufous-tailed Scrub Robin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Genet and Prickly pear (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.
You would be best advised to consult WikiProject Gastropods if you want to take that course of action. There are several active members and some might like to help. For the moment, I am concentrating on trying to gain maximum points during the final round of the WikiCup and think that Gastropoda might take up too much of my time. That would be OK if it was successful at FAC by the end of October but that is a rather tight time frame.
Okay then, but I think you should try tunicate for FA sometime after the cup (or for the next cup).
Not an invertebrate, but would you be interested in Salamander for FAC? Theoretically, I am working jointly with Sasata on that article and have been through and improved large parts of it, but Sasata has not actually participated in improving it yet. We could do with another collaborator. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:23, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:
If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.
This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.
Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 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) 06:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Willow Ptarmigan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk(talk)23:35, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.
This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.
Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 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) 06:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Blackcurrant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of ColonelHenry -- ColonelHenry(talk)01:44, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Onion you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of ColonelHenry -- ColonelHenry(talk)01:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Great Plague of London you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001(talk)06:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
On 3 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fieldfare, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when Fieldfares sit in a tree, they all tend to face in the same direction? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fieldfare. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
I see that you have Fieldfare at GA. I won't review it because I'm going to Cornwall for a few days, but if you want to take it to FA eventually, I can send you the section from Clement Thrushes (or just add the stuff, whichever you prefer). I'm going to put up Mistle Thrush at FAC when I get back, so if these both go through, that will be four of the six British Thrushes at GA/FA. Featured topic???. Jimfbleak - talk to me?14:04, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I might take it on to FA but am busy on other things at the moment, so no rush. Let's leave the idea till you get back. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Hi Cwmhiraeth. Just wondering, since you were also a winner of the Core Contest, what has been the last contact you've had with Richard Symonds? I haven't heard from him for about three weeks now—though clearly he's not at the Wikimedia offices all the time, just worried that I've been forgotten or there's a communication issue! All the best, MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 14:57, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
I had a request from him a month ago asking me to provide a suitable email address to which the prize voucher could be sent. This I did and have received no further communication. I was wondering what had happened too. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I will make a few more enquiries this week when I get a chance and let you guys know the result. Otherwise I can see myself forgetting about this completely! MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 11:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
I was thinking about this yesterday as it happens. I have heard no more from Richard Symonds or anyone else. I have raised the matter on the Core Contest talk page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
On 6 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Korean hare, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Korean hare was at one time considered to be a subspecies of the Chinese hare? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 6 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chinese hare, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Korean hare was at one time considered to be a subspecies of the Chinese hare? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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 there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article American bullfrog you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk(talk)03:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Started the comments on my review. I apologize for the delay...holiday here in the States on Monday and a busy work week to return to afterwards.--ColonelHenry (talk) 18:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Take all the time you need, there's no rush. Just let me know how long you think you need. If you're wondering, I have an interest in fruit because I grow a little on my grandparents' farm (wine grapes, greengages, damsons, heirloom apples and pears, and a few bushes of blackcurrant) and plan to apply for a winery/distillery license over the next year. I'll get started on the onion review likely tomorrow. --ColonelHenry (talk) 11:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at ColonelHenry's talk page.
This has to be the single best edit I've seen in a long time. Such a basic article, and you've gotten it to a decent quality. Good job! Shame the Core Contest isn't running now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
On 9 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Birth, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that although the majority of insects lay eggs, aphids can give birth to live young (pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Birth. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Your work on Birth is an excellent improvement of a very important topic (presumably on the vital articles list somewhere, and at any rate gets more than 1/8 million yearly views) and I commend your thoughtfulness in noticing the need and then acting on it. (A second barnstar for the same achievement is well deserved!) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fieldfare you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PumpkinSky -- PumpkinSky(talk)01:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Text of pilaris:L. pilare to deprive of hair (pilus hair). Mod. L. pilaris thrush; a confused coining, mistaking Gr. trikhas type of thrush for thrix, trikhos hair (L. pilus hair; cf. unconnected pilaris of the ball > pila ball);
"However, continued ocean acidification is causing many parts of the ocean to become undersaturated with these minerals, which is likely to affect the ability of some organisms to produce and maintain their shells."
"Ocean acidification is expected to impact ocean species to varying degrees. Photosynthetic algae and seagrasses may benefit from higher CO2 conditions in the ocean, as they require CO2 to live just like plants on land. On the other hand, studies have shown that a more acidic environment has a dramatic effect on some calcifying species, including oysters, clams, sea urchins, shallow water corals, deep sea corals, and calcareous plankton."
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lesser Grey Shrike may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
of various flowering plants such as cudweed (''[[Gnaphalium]]'') and (''Filago (genus)|Filago]]''), and thyme (''[[Thymus]]''), and lined with whisps of wool, hairs, roots and feathers. There
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Red-flanked duiker may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
duiker feeds on leaves, flowers and fruit and also browses on twigs, usually within one metre )yard) of the ground. Favoured species include ''[[Phoenix reclinata]]'', ''[[Nauclea latifolia]]'', ''[[
Heya, I've just reviewed the Bicolored shrew article for DYK and while it meets the various criteria I do have a problem with the lead. At the moment its just a list of habitats of the animal and not really a summary of the overall article. Also you might want to check the piping on Georgia. Miyagawa (talk) 10:59, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
On 15 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Desert Wheatear, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when the Desert Wheatear finds an insect too large for it to swallow, it sometimes displays in front of it by fluttering its wings? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Desert Wheatear. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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 think we have one last chance - now - to agree the issues or watch it go under. I'm quite aware of the feelings involved but basically we have to forget personal opinions and look at the text itself. I'm minded to agree that we split off sections as new articles, replacing them with summaries - I've written a draft one for Culture. I believe if we do that, positively and with enthusiasm, we will quickly reach agreement, and if not, we won't. I actually don't think it will harm the article any, and I suspect it won't take much effort, either - almost all the detailed work is done. Give it a go with me? Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:57, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm a bit more optimistic than you but will nevertheless be happy for you to proceed in this way, the main objective being that the article "Sea" is successful. So, carry on. I suggest you remove the Culture section first and then assess any response before lopping off any other bits. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Done that; sorry, emergency here at base, got to go, but there's a To do list on my talk page. Suggest add Polynesian sailors to "Indigenous sea peoples". Will return as soon as I can, good luck! Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
OK, we'll go step by step. History is suggested for trimming, but actually it is already a short version of a lot of stuff, and most of the sub-articles exist (even if flaky). I've taken out about 2 kB of text - we're approaching halfway and it's getting trickier. How do you see us shortening the article some more? We seem to need about 2 more Cultures' worth. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
I think it is most unwise to argue as we require agreement. However, let's wait for a reply and act accordingly - the article is now close to the guideline which may perhaps be sufficient for agreement. If not, we will need to create another sub-article and replace it with a summary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't think we actually need Snowman to say that he supports the candidacy but it will of course be helpful if he does. (See the top of the nomination page about what the delegates are looking for.) Let's see how Snowman responds to my comment before deciding on further action. I am thinking of approaching a delegate and asking for a ruling on whether the length of the article would be a bar to its success. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Gosh. I am a newbie when it comes to procedure. I read the rules on consensus and there was nothing on approaching delegates; that must be an action of last resort, with uncertain outcome, though your question sounds logical. Personally I'd rather reach agreement by negotiation and editing, which it appears we are well on the way to doing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
I've done a little more - not much more can be done this way, so let's wait and see if it's enough. If you can see anything else to trim with discretion, please do it as every little may help - another 3 - 5 kB would be good. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Right, I think it's time to take stock. It seems the immediate risk of a split has been averted. However the latest news from the front today is - a continuing feeling that the Humans bit is too long, and a broad hint that more comments - a lot of them - are on the way, with the suggestion that responding to them will be tricky because each addition will make the article 1k longer so we'll constantly be pushing and shoving to save space each time, cramping our writing style. Guess you can see where this is leading, and I know how you feel about the article, so my apologies. Here goes. I've gone through the Humans section, and honestly (read it and try to make sense of the order of subsections) it's become a bit of a jumble. I suspect we have two ways ahead: try to make do and mend with each of the next hundred comments, squeeze them in, and keep doing a bit more pruning until the article more or less falls to bits; or, hive off the Humans section, leaving a summary section behind, and then there'll be a lot less to worry about in terms of comments, and a lot more room to play with for any additions. I've made a rough summary paragraph here, it needs polishing. If we go that way, we'll get a whole lot less backchat and perhaps we'll pull through. Of course the reply may be it's still not ready ('young') but that could happen whatever we do: we can at least get our reply in first, that we think the Humans bit is the 'youngest' part of the article so we've hived it off so it can progress to GA when it's ready for it, which should take a bit of the wind from the sails. It feels to me like a route that might just work; staying as we are isn't going to, my gut feeling says. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:34, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Update: my feeling is confirmed by a list of new comments about Humans - I'm sure a whole lot more will follow, with damaging effect. We should act promptly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
I see no advantage in acting promptly. Your summary is a good effort but I do not at all like the idea of substituting it for the present "Humans and the sea" section. Please do not do anything while I think about it overnight and consult others. We currently have three people supporting the article as it is (or rather as it was before the Culture section went) and they may withdraw their support if we remove half of it as you are suggesting. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, that's an important consideration. There could be a middle road - e.g. both a 'Humans' summary section and a 'Culture' summary section, for example. Speak to you tomorrow. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
FWIW, Snowman often reviews my bird FACs. He is a diligent and thorough reviewer who will go through articles very thoroughly. In the past he has not always then given an opinion, but in more recent reviews he has been more inclined to offer (sometimes qualified) support. It is unlikely that delegates will take any action to archive an article that is still under active review, and remember that it's not a vote. A few of my FAs have gone through despite an unresolved oppose, and you have three supports, which is the unwritten requirement for promotion.
With regard to length, you could ask a delegate, but I'm not aware of any maximum or minimum. Pinniped is 98k, even in its current slimmed down version. My inclination always is to sit tight and keep dealing with actionable comments. Short of belated outright opposes, you should be OK Jimfbleak - talk to me?05:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm really excited about the prospect of a high-level general interest article like Sea becoming a featured article! I know, I wasn't able to support (nor oppose), and I do hope the discrepancy (between what most articles seem to mean when they link to "Sea" and what the article mainly concerns) is eventually resolved. But I wish all the best for the article, sincerely.
Also, I notice that desert is a GAN, and I am very tempted to review... but "desert" is such a broad article with so many diverse facets that it's intimidating for me even to review (and I think other reviewers feel the same). I can only imagine the work it took to get it into the great shape that it's in.
Thank you for this which I only just noticed. There is now a proposal to split the article Sea on its talk page. I'm giving it a rest for tonight. Back to the fray tomorrow! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
Hello. You have a new message at ColonelHenry's talk page.
Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion pilot plant
Yokogawa Electric Corp announced a pilot OTEC plant in 2012. One goal was "to study methods for the reduction of power generation costs" -- i.e. it was still far too expensive to make use of seawater temperature difference in 2012 but might one day get cheaper.
If you want to take a whack at an article that might be the shortest GAN candidate and future shortest FAC candidate, I've nominated Samuel Merrill Woodbridge for GA. I started the article today, and in addition to putting it up at GAN, also put up a hook for DYK.--ColonelHenry (talk) 20:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
I addressed your suggestions at the Woodbridge GA1 review. Thanks. I'll take a look at the Sea FAC this afternoon. I look forward to supporting the work you and Chiswick Chap did on Sea, that is a very impressive article.--ColonelHenry (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
On 19 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bicolored shrew, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when danger threatens, one of the young of the bicolored shrew grips its mother while the others join on behind forming a chain? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bicolored shrew. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Hello again. The talk page now contains additional requests which appear pretty much mandated, and something close to a vote of support for the article's length. It seems we need to mention the diving depth record, which could go with a bit on commercial diving; and a bit on 'current research and exploration' (partly connected to diving). Not sure where these should go - research would make most sense under Oceanography, while the diving probably needs to be a new section under Humans as it's only partly to do with oil/extractive industry (e.g. is also military). Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure what has happened to my talk page. We have a section called "Origins of oceanography and deep sea exploration", we could instead have "Origins of oceanography" and "Research and deep sea exploration". I'm going to give Sea a miss now till tomorrow. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:44, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
OTEC (Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion) is being asked for again, though actually we have 2 links to it... one reviewer is trimming the section, while another wants more. Not sure what to say. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Desert you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sp33dyphil -- Sp33dyphil(talk)14:00, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tunicate you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack(talk)11:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
On 22 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Heteromyidae, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that kangaroo rats in the family Heteromyidae do not need to drink because they obtain sufficient water from metabolising their food? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Heteromyidae. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 24 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Giant mole rat, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Asian giant mole rat digs burrows with its teeth, and the East African mole rat can swim? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
I took another look at the Sea FAC and offered my support. Great work on that article.
If no one has taken up a GA review on Parsnip, I can do one this afternoon. I only see one thing that I'd change on first glance...moving the name origins of Parsnip into the Taxonomy section since it's a too-small on its own, and rename the section "Taxonomy and naming" or "Taxonomy and etymology" or something of the sort.--ColonelHenry (talk) 12:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank yo for your support on the Sea FAC. Yes, I noticed you had put Samuel Merrill Woodbridge forward at FAC and I will take another look. The criteria for featured article are rather higher than those for good article status and I usually restrict my comments on the FAC page to my view on the prose and comprehensiveness of an article. It is more difficult doing the former for an article on an American subject because of the different idiom you use across the Atlantic. With regard to Parsnip, your GA review offer is welcome. Sasata is co-nominator. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
As Churchill said, we're two peoples separated by a common language. After several years living in London and Shropshire (Church Stretton), a little BritEng influenced some of my orthography and style, but sadly, not enough. ;-) I miss the Sunday pub roasts and Maltesers (the American equivalent sucks). --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:42, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Parsnip you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ColonelHenry -- ColonelHenry(talk)16:40, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
On 25 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article School shark, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the school shark was at one time used as a source of vitamin A as its liver was shown to have higher levels of this vitamin than any other fish tested? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/School shark. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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 appears to be in the eligibility criteria for DYK that good articles are acceptable. That should mean it has been implemented, hasn't it? I was nominating it based on the RfC. It was closed in favor, and now the eligibility criteria say as much. RGloucester — ☎13:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Fast-moving events! We can work on your suggestions and renominate the article later. Thank you in any event for taking on the review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
On 27 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hodgson's bat, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that newborn Hodgson's bats are about 2.15 centimetres (0.85 in) long and start to fly in their third week of life? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hodgson's bat. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Excellent. Well, we all need some motivating factor on here in such a hostile environment, so good luck with that! If ever you need a GA reviewer give me a buzz.♦ Dr. Blofeld18:49, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
The article Desert you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Desert for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sp33dyphil -- Sp33dyphil(talk)01:20, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth, could you please return to this review and give an appropriate icon? George Ho, for reasons that escape me, came along and gave one, while at the same time hoping the sources were okay, which does not give me confidence that the icon was appropriate, since the icon he gave as an AGF tick, and you don't mention anything about offline sources. Please make sure your icon supersedes his. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC) (added sentence at 00:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC))
Let me know when you're ready. Could you work on Taxonomy and evolution (maybe by sandbox)? I could send/refer you some papers. I prefer we mostly re-write the article from scratch. LittleJerry (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Things now having eased off with regards to the WikiCup, I have made a start on the Taxonomy and evolution section(s) in my userspace. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Its got 15 pages on "Food and feeding habits", 6 pages on "Mortality and predators", 10 on "Social behaviour", 15 on "Reproduction" and 20 on "Habitats". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Wow! Well feel free to join in on "Ecology and life history". I started on Feeding and was planning on "Reproduction and parenting" "Growth and mortality" and "Communication" subsections" Which of these would you be able to do? LittleJerry (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll start working on reproduction and parenting. Should I get into courtship and such? That involves lots of communication. LittleJerry (talk) 17:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I think it would be better if communication had its own section and I think reproductive behavior can include information on dominance hierarchies. I've included information on social spacing in the lead of "Ecology and behavior". You can expand it if you want. Could you also add more on habitats? LittleJerry (talk) 19:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes I was thinking that would be a good idea but inertia ruled the day! What about the Griggs reference? The pdf link does not work, but also, the source is used multiple times and could be treated like a book as it has page numbers. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Grigg has 4 chapters on Crocodilians, so we might want to cite him as a book and then refer either to chapters or to specific page ranges. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:03, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll probably spilt "respiration, circulation and digestion" into separate sections. I'll work on expanding the former two, could you do the latter? Maybe include excretion? LittleJerry (talk) 22:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I have returned my book to the library but could get it out again if required. I regard the culture section of the article as a necessary but bothersome section and my book is twenty years old. I will glance through it next time I am in town and will see if it has anything relevant. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Knifetooth sawfish
On 1 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Knifetooth sawfish, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the knifetooth sawfish(pictured) and the longcomb sawfish can be told apart by the number of teeth on their saws? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 1 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Longcomb sawfish, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the knifetooth sawfish(pictured) and the longcomb sawfish can be told apart by the number of teeth on their saws? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Sasata (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).
The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 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) 23:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
October 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Desert may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
|work=ThinkQuest |publisher=Oracle |accessdate=2013-05-22}}</ref> The [[Saharan silver ant]] (''Cataglyphis bombycina''} uses a [[heat shock protein]] in a novel way and forages in the open during brief forays in the
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ashy-faced Owl may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
similar to darker types of Barn Owl. The facial disc is heart-shaped and ashy grey. The dorsal {upper) surface of the head and body is yellowish-brown speckled with dark grey or black and the ventral (
On 2 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pied Wheatear, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Pied Wheatear often perches on a bush or rock, bobbing its tail up and down while looking around for insects? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pied Wheatear. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
I'm a bit shellshocked from seeing the tremendous difficulties you've been having at the desert and sea nominations. You've been working extremely hard, answering all sorts of objections and making speedy modifications as requested, without seeming to take any of the comments personally. I was going to review desert, but was waiting for the sea nomination to finish first... and now I see there are already two people reviewing that GAN.
I guess my question is, is there anything I can do to help? I know I can't fill in lots of sourced information, since my knowledge of the desert and the sea is quite limited. I don't suppose another GAN reviewer for desert would help, and though I thought of plowing into a full Sea review, that FAC has had over a dozen people offering comments and suggestions already! I'm not sure one more would help. What do you think? I really admire the attempt to bring such wide-topic articles into GA or FA status. Is there some way I can be of assistance? All the best, – Quadell(talk)19:22, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your commiserations. I am hopeful that both reviews will be concluded soon, the Sea one in particular seems interminable. I try to be polite to reviewers even when they make rude remarks because it is counter-productive to do otherwise. As for helping, you could always review Salt when I nominate it at GAN shortly - I am just waiting for one of the two present reviews to finish. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chinchillidae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chaco (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.
Hi Cwmhiraeth. I'm so pleased to see Sea promoted today. Well done getting through all that hassle and achieving that well-deserved result! --Stfg (talk) 11:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes. Suffice to say there's a group of topics I no longer copy edit because I know it's likely to pan out like that. And those broad topics are already the hardest to cover. Well done again. --Stfg (talk) 11:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure. I may not be expert enough to help with technical matters but I'd be glad to help keep the ball rolling at least. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:12, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
On 6 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Altai Snowcock, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Altai Snowcock and other species of Snowcock live above the tree line in mountain ranges in Asia? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
On 6 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Snowcock, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Altai Snowcock and other species of Snowcock live above the tree line in mountain ranges in Asia? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
I've expanded Vauvert quite a bit. You might like to add something on the prehistory, economy, etc. If you need further help on this one, let me know. I'll now move on to Langlade, Gard.--Ipigott (talk) 07:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
I've made a start on Langlade, Gard. I'm not too sure how far to go to meet DYK requirements on these one-liners with a box. If you want me to expand further, there's plenty of information on the station, etc., on the French site. Otherwise I can move on to Fourques.--Ipigott (talk) 08:34, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
In regard to Vauvert, I added a bit more detail on the garage than you probably need but thought it might be useful for clarification. Please feel free to shorten it as you wish. Sorry about the leads. Feel free to rewrite them as you wish. I know that it is sometimes useful to include something relating to the DYK hook there. I've started to do a bit on Fourques, Gard but will leave the rest to you. I certainly don't want to cause any difficulties by adding too much content. Let me know if you want me to continue working on any of the others. Maybe it would be better for me simply to go through your own additions to see if the translations are OK. I won't do anything more on any of them unless I hear from you. It's been interesting looking into the history of this little corner of France. I had not realized that the religious wars had had such impact there.--Ipigott (talk) 14:01, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Have added quite a bit to Le Cailar but haven't touched the lead. Having connection problems at the moment but everything should be fixed tomorrow.--Ipigott (talk) 16:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I've added quite a bit on Bouillargues. As far as I can see, that more or less completes the assignment. It's been interesting working with you. Let me know whenever you need further assistance.--Ipigott (talk) 09:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
OK. That'll be all for now, then. Good luck with the WikiCup - I must say you seem to be streets ahead of everyone else at the moment. You've been doing a great job on content. I've been very impressed with all your other work, especially Sea.--Ipigott (talk) 10:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
On 7 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Meles (genus), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that there are three living and two extinct species of badger in the genus Meles? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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 there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Salt you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- Quadell(talk)20:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whitecheek shark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Extirpation (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.
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Sea to FA status recently. If you would like to see it appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see it on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,327 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any questions TFA-related or problems, please let me know. To get such an important article as "Sea" to FA status is quite an achievement, and I'm torn between wanting to pick it ASAP and saving it for a special sea-related day, if there is such a thing... BencherliteTalk17:29, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, I've never nominated any of my other FAs, but it would be quite nice to see it there. Perhaps soon, while it is still recognisably in the state we left it in. Incidentally, the topmost image in the article was changed by someone during the review and I think it is rather dull. I would like to change it back to the crashing wave we used to have. What do you think? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I've drafted the blurb at a magical 199 words, see what you think. (Amazing how much one can say in a short space, actually, if one just goes for it without a committee.) If you're happy we can just post it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I've studied the criteria - it's 1200 displayed chars, not any number of words, so I've added a little bit, please check. Do you think we should a) ask Bencherlite; b) put it in the Pending list (next 12 months); c) request a specific date; or d) ask for 'within the next 7 unallocated dates'? Option e) (do nothing) might see it on the front page any time in the next few years. It seems that Bencherlite is keen. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Looks good to me. I would think it should be nominated for a nonspecific date. Its point count seems quite high, but really I know little about the TFA process. Are we meant to work out the points or someone else? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:23, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Well I guess it starts off at 6 points for a core topic but apart from that I'm not sure. If we put some point score such as 8, maybe others can adjust the points if they are wrong. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
For your contributions to bring Desert (estimated annual readership: 1,285,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
On 12 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Le Cailar, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that archaeologists at Le Cailar in southern France have unearthed about thirty decapitated human skulls? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Le Cailar. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Yes, the site referenced in Le Cailar mentions decapitation. I spent forty minutes trying to find a valid e-mail address for someone involved with that site, to tell them of their mistake. Thank you for being reasonable and not insisting that the error be restored. DS (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I was principally concerned because the article is at DYK at the moment and the hook I put forward mentioned "decapitated skulls", but I see someone has removed the word "decapitated" from the hook so that's not a problem. Pity, though. Heads that have been cut off are more interesting than mere skulls. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I removed the word "decapitated", because it makes no sense in that context. The only case where a head or skull could be decapitated is Zaphod Beeblebrox. If you mention a head or skull being decapitated, you are using the word incorrectly. When you sharpen a pencil, you produce pencil shavings, but you do not talk about "sharpened shavings". Only the pencil has been sharpened, by the removal of the shavings; similarly, only a body can be decapitated, by the removal of its head. A skull has nothing to decapitate. DS (talk) 22:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anatomy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001(talk)01:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
On 14 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Desert, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that only about 20% of the world's deserts are sandy (dunes pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Desert. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
But I have to ask, how did it make DYK? It's obviously been expanded a good deal, (more than a "new" article might be expanded) but the criteria is set so that increasing a substantial article by substantially more doesn't seem to count. The criteria is given in multiples of the original. This is not a question of idle curiosity, since I quite often expand upon major generic articles (art and architecture) and don't bother to put them up for DYK, for this reason. Amandajm (talk) 01:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
As Chris857 says, newly promoted GAs are now eligible for DYK so you will need to put the articles you expand through the GAN process, then nominate them for DYK within 5 days of their being promoted. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
On 15 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Aimargues, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in a bullfighting tradition in Aimargues, an unarmed "raseteur" attempts to snatch a rosette from between the bull's horns? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aimargues. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
The article Salt you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Salt for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- Quadell(talk)21:00, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.
This is a note to let the main editors of sea know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 2, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk·contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 2, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
If anyone has any questions about whether the term "awesome" applies or not, they should see what Cwmhiraeth has done with salt lately... – Quadell(talk)18:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
On 18 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ashy-faced Owl, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the diet of the Ashy-faced Owl includes small terrestrial mammals, bats, birds, amphibians and reptiles? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ashy-faced Owl. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Thank you. I will be glad to stop working on salt because it was amazing how thirsty it made me every time I saw the salt-encrusted rock and other images. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
On 19 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Caveirac, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the château at Caveirac now houses the town hall? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Caveirac. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
I'll take a look at the article, but the subject is far from my area of expertise and a lot of the technical terms are unfamiliar to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I've done a little copy-editing for smoothness, and don't have much to say other than that it reads very well and appears comprehensive to a non-specialist. You might like to add an etymology section to point out that it was named for the Marsh Harrier,[1] a predatory European bird that can indeed fly very slowly or hover. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:50, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I provided a source above, possibly reliable enough for a minor point. It should be possible to locate a badge or crest from the early RAF Harrier squadrons, also - I think they had the bird painted on a signboard at the airfield, if not on some of the early planes; not sure about the squadron badges, one has a hovering eagle! Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
"Later upgrades added the radar and a night-attack capability, resulting in the AV-8B(NA) and AV-8B Harrier II Plus, respectively." Haven't you got this the wrong way round?
The sentence starting "The second and third FSD aircraft" is too long and convoluted.
"...as much of the structures..." - did you mean "many of the structures" or "much of the structure"?
"The wing and the torsion box would be enlarged to accommodate extra fuel and hardpoints to improve the aircraft's endurance, with the lengthened wing itself to have folding wingtips." - I think this sentence unsatisfactory.
"Systems continued studying the design until the early 2000s, when it was abandoned." - Perhaps this should read "the project was abandoned."
"two intakes and four synchronized vectorable nozzles of which are located close to the turbine;"- Missing word.
".. increasing life-to-drag ratio." - "lift"?
"Italian Navy AV-8Bs are slated to be replaced by 15 (originally 22) F-35Bs, operating from the Cavour." - I'm not sure what tense this is supposed to be.
The first time you mention Lon Nordeen, you do not mention who he is but you do on the second.
On 20 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bouillargues, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the church at Bouillargues houses an 18th-century wooden statue of the Virgin Mary bearing the infant Jesus? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bouillargues. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Interesting! I have more respect for editors who constructively make the necessary alterations if they find errors in articles rather than plastering tags across them and complaining about "bad science". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:33, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Stainer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2(talk)15:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Crocodylus novaeguineae, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Papua and West Papua (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.
On 26 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Salt, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the World Health Organization advises that adults should consume less than 5 g (0.2 oz) of salt per day? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Salt. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
On 29 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Langlade, Gard, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Cavalier Windmill at Langlade(pictured), first mentioned in 1211, has been restored and is in good working order? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Langlade, Gard. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to 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.
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cwmhiraeth. 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.
