This user may have left Wikipedia. DustFormsWords has not edited Wikipedia since February 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
notifications of changes/debates/other issues around articles I've created, substantially edited, or participated in AfD debates for.
constructive feedback on my editing, including better ways of editing, policies and procedures I may not be aware of or have forgotten, or problems I may have caused unintentionally or otherwise
barnstars and other warm fuzzies
polite notifications if I've offended you, caused you inconvenience, or otherwise soured your day (these will be responded to with apologies!)
suggestions of articles, debates or projects I may be interested in
If you post on this talk page, I will reply on this talk page, so if you're waiting for a response feel free to add it to your watch list.
If there is content on this page authored by you which you wish to remove, or content you feel is defamatory or insulting to you, go ahead and boldly delete it. But I reserve the right to revert where I feel it's appropriate and/or replace the controversial content with edited or anonymised versions to preserve discussion continuity.
This discussion relates to edits to Fighting Fantasy, where I reverted some edits of the IP user below which he had made in the course of an otherwise much-needed improvement of the article.
That's fine. The lead was not an intentional revert - just missed that in the last edit. Too busy concentrating on finding sources for all these claims! Thanks. 125.7.71.6 (talk) 01:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Further to this, the FF article is almost there. That said, the other articles, particularly those on the individual titles, are woeful. Most are in-universe, full of trivia and little more than stubs. An editor has even gone so far as to put maps on each page. With the exception of The Warlock of Firetop Mountain, which also needs a major clean-up, I'd argue these could be deleted, with a link to the official site at each entry in List of Fighting Fantasy game books.
Sorry, I'm not sure what you're asking me. Are you looking for input on a general revamp of the whole series of FF articles? Making list entries link to external sites would certainly not be an acceptable way forward - they need to either link to Wikipedia articles, or to nothing. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, links we can work on. My main question for now is do you feel there is a need for an article (99% are stubs) on every FF book? There is almost no substance to any of them. Opinion, trivia etc. with almost no factual information. Surely they could be deleted, with some more detail added to another group page elsewhere? I'm as much a fan as the next person, but realize there have to be standards. 125.7.71.6 (talk) 04:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Technically speaking, yes, every book article that isn't able to source independent notability for the book through significant coverage in reliable independent sources should be deleted. I would expect that that would probably be the majority of books 11 through to 49, and many of the others. Practically speaking, if they're not actively wrong, misleading or promotional there's no urgent need to delete them, and there's always the chance that someone will come along and improve them. Which is to say, it would take work to delete them, and you're better off spending the energy to improve something instead. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm concerned that practically all of those books are now redirects. A substantial amount of content has been taken out of the mainspace with little or no discussion on whether this is helpful. Szzuk (talk) 23:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The content is still available in the article histories. If you believe the information can be usefully added to an article on a notable topic, go ahead and add it. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC
This discussion relates to the GA assessment I conducted for Hartford City Courthouse Square Historic District, where I identified a licensing problem for one of the images, and also recommended the addition of alt text.
I've not resolved the issues, but I suspect that they can easily be resolved. Alt text I can do at any time, of course, but File:Hartford City Square 1908.JPG will take some work tomorrow. My suspicion is that the image is taken from the Blackford County Interim Report — published by Indiana's state historic preservation people, it's quite a reliable source and heavily used in the article. If you look at the image, it shows a crease toward the top and darkness on the right edge; this suggests to me that the book's page was creased and that the image is located on the right end of a left-hand page of the book. I don't own the book, and I'm far from Blackford County, but because I'm an Indiana University student, I have quick access to a copy of the book from the university library, so I'll check it while there tomorrow if I can remember. I'm guessing (1) that it's scanned from this book, (2) that this book speaks of it being a photo taken and published in that period, and (3) the information in the book will be sufficient to confirm its PD status. I'll try to remember to drop you a line when I finish my research; if I don't get back to you in a couple of days, please pester me at my talk page. Thanks for doing the review! Nyttend (talk) 05:28, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. In a worst-case scenario you can take the 1908 one offline, replace it with one of TwoScarsUp's modern ones, get the Good Article tick, and then revisit the sourcing of the 1908 photo at your leisure. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:31, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I actually prefer a more modern picture, but TwoScars has done enough work on this article that I'd like to respect his/her preference for a lead image if possible, so I'll do my best to find out the situation. I'll not hesitate to replace it if I can't establish PD status, however. I've asked TwoScars to give either a confirmation or a denial of the scenario I proposed above for the origin of the image. Nyttend (talk) 05:41, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Checked the Blackford County Interim Report, and I can't find the image — perhaps it was scanned from a print owned by the local historical society? I've invited TwoScars to clarify the situation; given the date of the image, I still expect that it's PD, but I've nominated it for deletion because I don't have proof. Hopefully we can see proof added soon. I've replaced it with File:Tyner Bldg Hartford City IN.jpg, a PD-self image taken by TwoScars; I had trouble finding a good image, since the best ones were already used elsewhere in the article. I'll see when I can get the alt text added (how long has that been a GA requirement? That wasn't brought up on the first GA nomination that I tried, two years ago); today's my first day of grad school classes for the semester, so I'll not likely be able to do anything before this evening at the earliest. Thanks again for doing the review! Nyttend (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll revisit this today after I finish off my other GA review. Re: alt text, I regard alt text as part of the requirement for "suitable captions". It may be that I'm wrong about it being required for GA but in any case it's not a lot of work and all images should in any case have alt text. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Upon further reading of essays and community discussions, it appears that alt text is specifically NOT required for GA, so I'll go amend the review accordingly. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just went to add alt text to the article, but being less familiar with the practice, I decided to pattern it after Kent, Ohio, which was promoted to FA last September. To my surprise, that article doesn't have any alt text at all, and the same is true of the version that was current when it was officially promoted to FA. Do proper image captions satisfy the requirements? Nyttend (talk) 14:11, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't done FA review, but as far as I'm aware FAs are required to fully comply with the manual of style, which includes the provision of alt text for images. (See the last point under WP:MOSIMAGES.) It's not something a lot of people are aware of, or check for, so it's possible that the Kent article slipped through the net. I guess it's something you can take up if you ever take this one to FA. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the GA assessment I conducted for House (1977 film).
Hello Dust! I've tried to expand upon your suggestions for the House article. Thanks for all your suggestions. You are a good and thorough reviewer! Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:10, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your time to review the article on House! I'll try to take a stab at reviewing a a GA nom perhaps this weekend. Have a good evening! Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:06, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the GA reassessment I conducted for Josie Petrick Kemarre.
Thank you for your suggestions - while there is obviously some disagreement about whether a review was needed, I'm happy to have done additional work to address your concerns, and the article is much better for that. I hope we can at least agree to disagree on the matter of the list, thereby perhaps avoiding going to community reassessment. Anyway, take a look at the current version and see what you think. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I might not get a chance to look at it until next Monday, but my current thoughts are that the article has now been substantially improved as a result of the reassessment process, and in that light I'm inclined to probably take a pass at improving it myself and then give it the green light. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:29, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the discussion there seems to agree that there's no inherent problem in a bulleted list being in a GA, but that usually for an embedded bulleted list to pass GA it needs to have a high quality introductory prose paragraph explaining the list content. Which is basically what I was trying to say, but maybe not succeeding. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Humour
I made the mistake of attempting to be funny at ANI. This was the result.
Smile
Hello DustFormsWords, Boing! said Zebedee (talk) has smiled at you as a result of reading "Apologies also for bringing humour to ANI, which I realise per policy is a dull and humourless place where hope goes to wither, die, and be indefinitely blocked" and thinking it was even funnier than your original irony. 14:41, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to reiterate my apology for letting the air out of your tires after your really-quite-funny remarks at ANI. It's embarrassing that I read your comments so carelessly that I didn't recognize that they were in no way disrespectful to Tunisia or Tunisians at all, but were an ironic send-up concerning our collective bias on Wikipedia for Western media sources.
I saw you were available for assistance, and hoping you can help. I'm confused as to what sources are designated "reliable." I've made some edits using interviews with Songwriters found on Songfacts.com (http://www.songfacts.com/blog/interviews/), which lately have been deleted with the note "not a reliable source". My latest example is a contribution I made to the Dar Williams page where my contribution is still there, but the reference was stripped, which doesn't seem fair.
I found where a user discussed Songfacts as a reliable source on [1] and made my case for why an interview with a songwriter was a valid resource for an article on a songwriter, but I'm not sure what happened from there. Is there someone who then determines if this is a reliable source? The discussion took place around Jan. 12.
The Songfacts article itself is also up for deletion by the same user who is deleting my contributions. I don't want to start an edit war, but would like to see my sources listed. Any ideas on how I can clarify if Songfacts interviews are a reliable source and how I can get my contributions restored?
Thanks for your reply, it was very helpful. Based on your response, it sounds like there has not been a consensus on whether or not Songfacts is a reliable source, and I find it discouraging that I can't use an interview with Dar Williams on the Dar Williams entry. What has me really baffled is that the user deleted my reference but left my contribution. That doesn't seem fair to the site that generated the original content.
Feel free to take that argument to TenPoundHammer or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard! You might be successful! Although I should warn you that we don't typically tend to care very much what other sites consider reliable; we have our own standard. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors
Hi! I noticed your activity as a Good Article reviewer, and wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.
If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!
You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).
I was looking at the cover images uploaded by people and making a tally to see who I could contact for help, and I noticed that you have uploaded a few such images. Obviously I'm not asking you to take this whole thing on by yourself, but any help you can give is appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons#Need book cover images. Thanks! :)
Hi! I'll be frank, the images I uploaded were from Wizards of the Coast promotional packs and press kits. I've looked over your list, and while I have some of those titles (Top Ballista, for example, I think is still in a box somewhere) none of my copies are in good enough condition to provide a cover scan - they have frayed edges, very severe creasing, and tears. I have a reasonable run of 4E stuff but you should be able to get covers of all of those just from storefronts and press kits. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:42, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DustFormsWords has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, so I've officially declared today as DustFormsWords's Day! For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian, enjoy being the star of the day, DustFormsWords!
This article was a re-write of a previous article for Expansive Media Ltd which was live on wikipedia for two years and created by an editor with no connection to the company whatsoever. I amended the company name and a few project facts and tried to include as many notable web links as possible. Then after discussion with a Wiki administrator, the site was re-posted in new form on Sunday including more info than the original article ever had. The problem is that I'm very new to Wikipedia so if you could please offer guidance on exactly what the article requires to remain relevant and live I can have a bash at improving it ASAP. There are plenty of web links that mention and discuss Expansive/Media Promotions mostly because of their tussles with the ASA and their critical opinions of UK newspaper promotions. The fact that their promotions frequently land on the front pages of the UK's (and the world's) biggest newspapers has prompted a discussion over editorial independence and integrity - the balance between 'earnt' and 'bought' media coverage. As the authour of the article is it up to me to state these comments or do I need to link to web resources that state them. If and when I find the links where do they get added to the article? In the main body copy (if so how do I do this) or under the section External Links. Apologies in advance for the denseness of any of my questions : ) Julie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juemason (talk • contribs) 14:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to edits I made to White Argentine, which eventually culminated in the article being nominated for deletion.
I know Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but unfortunately "White Argentine" don't exist as a "social or ethnic" group. It is just a "term" used to describe some people who has some fisical features. In fact, the whole article is discussed as Original Research.--GiovBag (talk) 16:10, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Chair" is a term used to describe a free-standing object used as a sitting aid. We still phrase the article as "A chair is..." not "Chair is a term for...". It's not relevant that it's not a term universally used - again, our "chair" article doesn't feel the need to explain in the lead that it's called something different in French or German, or refer to cultural subgroups who don't distinguish between chairs and sofas, or what have you. But I only hit this article in passing, and don't really care enough to fight for it. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are perfectly right. But in the article the problem is when it says White Argentine are ..., is assigned a category of reality to something that is nothing more than a presumption. Maybe is better to delete this kind of articles that don't respond to any official, academic or recognized categories, and are no more than attempts to put together two variables of different nature. Almost like making an article for the "green-eyed English" or "Italian over 170 cm tall. "--GiovBag (talk) 01:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the Good Article Review for Delphine LaLaurie. A dispute between the reviewing editor and a third party unfortunately found its way to my talk page.
I left this message on the GA review page, but predictably, 56tyvfg88yju removed it:
This reviewer has given several pretty bad reviews for GA and FAC, characterized by a shaky grasp of writing and Wikipedia guidelines and given unnecessarily harshly. I'd ask for another reviewer right now. --Moni3 (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take the review if you want it, but don't be surprised to see that 56tyvfg88yju has a poor grasp of policy and may eventually insert abusive comments masked by what he thinks is wit. Bummer for you. --Moni3 (talk) 22:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Moni3 has been stalking and harrassing me after I was forced to fail a GAN for legitimate reasons. This sort of conduct is inexcusable. I apologize for Moni3. The review for Delphine LaLaurie is finished (but I'm checking everything twice!) and awaits your response. 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 22:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, as far as I can tell 56tyvfg88yju's GAR is well within the standards of a good GAR and his/her comments are useful in the improvement of the article. I'll take your advice above, Moni3, as a good faith attempt to inform me of possibly relevant interactions you've had with another editors, but in this case I have no reason to be concerned and I would appreciate if further argument between the two of you stays off my talk page. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but it's not an article I'm interested in working on. The facts currently in the article are reliably sourced so there's no urgent need for further expansion, and interested parties are able to get the sources through the archived AfD. Richard Norton creates about a million of these every month based on the historical photos he uploads; trying to follow along behind him and expand for purely procedural reasons is a losing proposition. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the Good Article Review for William Blackstone. The initial reviewer had not been able to complete the review after some considerable delay, and so I offered to take over the review.
Thanks for taking over this this - it was always going to pass w minor corrections, but sadly I over the last month I never had the time I felt it deserved to devote to it. Meshing wikipedia and real life is hard but awesome articles like this should remind me why i should try and do better in the future. Ajbpearce (talk) 00:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the Good Article Review I conducted for Will Munro.
Thanks again for the review. Although I could still do some more work in reducing the amount of quotes in the article, I'm wondering if you think the changes I made just now are sufficient for GA status. Also, do let me know if you've thought of any other ideas for improvement! Best, Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! It seems likely I won't get to consider your changes until tomorrow, if you can stand to wait an extra day, but I promise I'll check it over then. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the Good Article Review I conducted for Nikolai Podgorny.
Thanks for reviewing the article, I really appreciate it. I've responded to all your comments, are there any more problems??? --TIAYN (talk) 07:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've reworded, and fixed, the problems you saw with the article. NB: should I write on your wall when I think i'm finished, or will you check out the article yourself? --TIAYN (talk) 12:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm finished! :) I must admit, you're one of the best reviewers I've come across here on Wikipedia. You're very good with detail, and checking sources, not many other reviewers are. Even so, thanks for reviewing the article. --TIAYN (talk) 07:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hereby award you this barnstar for your dedication to the biographies and historical querks of Quebecians, which if it isn't a word should be. - ManicSpider (talk) 05:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the Good Article Review I conducted for History of Hollyoaks. I quickfailed the article for having cleanup tags still unresolved.
Hi, I am actually grateful that you failed the History of Hollyoaks article because it was an embarrassment to see it nominated but I am not yet confident about doing GAN reviews myself. I would have failed it if I knew how, though, and have been in discussion about how to fix the many, many problems with it (as you have seen). Tbh, I'm not really that interested in the subject and feel like I am hitting a bit of a brick wall with regard to the enthusiastic but somewhat misguided originator. I'll do my best to assist that person but, frankly, it is never going to be a GAN again in my opinion and probably should not even exist except as a stub. Thanks for your courtesy message. Sitush (talk) 00:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Sitush. It's actually not that bad an article. Line by line it's pretty okay, and well referenced - no problem with its current B class rating. You just need to fix the rest of the referencing issues, condense down the paragraphs into larger paragraphs, maybe stick in some subheadings, and then see if the entire thing makes sense or whether it could be improved by a reorganisation. It clearly would have failed a full GAR if it hadn't been quickfailed but it wouldn't have been a complete wash. These articles are notoriously difficult to write and I think everyone involved should feel proud that it's, on average, as good as it is. Just not GA standard, that's all. Feel free to copy this comment to the article talk page if you feel it's helpful. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am surprised that you consider it to be well referenced. It has a lot of citations, sure, but do Digital Spy and "gossip" magazines really constitute reliable sources? They regurgitate pap and soundbites rather than fact and are often driven by publicists out to grab a quick headline and with little regard to truth. I'm not a soap fan - I rarely watch TV due to my profound deafness - and so perhaps my understanding of "reliable sources" in the context of soap operas is awry. My involvement stemmed from seeing it at the head of the GAN list and wanting to try to fix a few problems. Alas, my opinion is that many of them are not capable of being fixed without resort to tables and timelines. Do you think that such devices might help or hinder? Sitush (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's a point I'm not inclined to consider deeply unless the article gets renominated. In relation to the plots of soap operas and their behind-the-scenes working I, personally, would generally consider a dedicated soap gossip magazine to be a reasonable source unless it were making a truly extraordinary claim or it were contradicted elsewhere. But, seeing as I'm not now doing a full GAR, I'll leave that discussion for those with more experience in soap articles. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I never noticed this discussion before or the note on the article talk. Thankyou DFW for your good positive suggestions on the talk page of this article. Regarding digitalspy as a source, you can you it when editing your own articles. Rest assured it's been to the reliable source notice board more than once and passed. Plus since 2008 they verify there stories they take from other sources and sometimes more so with soap opera because they have exclusive content from the writers and producers. You know your stuff about soap opera magazines too. the reputable Inside Soap is considered reliable whilst a magazine like 'soap life' is not. You also got the gist I never edited a big recount page like that, I'm sticking to character articles, it seems to be what I'm good at. So thanks again for your kind constructive words, they have been noticed eventually. :pRAIN*the*ONEBAM01:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion relates to the Good Article Review I conducted for Dream Chronicles. I failed the article for a range of issues, most notably for not having clear and concise writing.
Hope it wasn't too crushing. It's always frustrating to review an article when it becomes clear it's going to fail, but don't let the number of problems I found eclipse the hard and good work you've done to get to this point. These games are worth having articles on and despite not being GA standard your articles are nevertheless much better than many of our videogame articles. Keep at it! - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's OK! :D "Hard fire creates hard diamond": if you were not tough to this article, then I would never realize/admit its real problems. Promoting these articles to GA ones is just a limit that encourages me to reach this! Again, again, thank you!!! :) Have a GREAT day on Wikipedia! †hinhin_of_you / buzzworthy / βoy Ünder Ғlowers04:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the prod tag you placed on Kelly Wiglesworth, as the article was discussed at AfD in September 2008. Compliance with policy is the only reason I did this; I have no comment on the merits of deletion and no prejudice against opening another AfD. —KuyaBriBriTalk02:52, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I think the PROD was probably an error on my part. I just started with Twinkle the other day and I'm rapidly discovering that one-push nominations are a trap; they don't prompt me to do nearly as much due diligence as I would if I had to go through all the steps manually. Learning! - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:58, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks
Thanks for pitching in, and going the extra mile; attempting to soothe the tension there on the article talk page in addition to your GA review. Much appreciated by all.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the pass, and I'm glad we found a compromise form of wording between us. I've made what I hope are the necessary changes as a result of your review to my other GANs (as well as to some past GAs and my standard template). Regards, BencherliteTalk11:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello DustFormsWords
I would really need your kind assistance and third party point of view reg the Wikipedia link on the artist & singer "LaGaylia Frazier" (the English version). As manager of LaGaylia Frazier, we are adamant the content is serious, neutral and factual. There exists a version with lot's of mistakes and unbiased information. Since yesterday I have tried to edit the content 3 times. But instantly the old version gets in there and my version/edits are gone. I don't know who or why this happens. How could this be straightened out in a constructive way?
As Wikipedia has a warning message on top of this Wikipedia site, we have tried to solve it according to their request. But, as I said, the unwanted content jumps back every time we improve by changing and editing.
This is the warning message from Wikipedia:
This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (September 2010)
This article may be written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view. Please clean it up to conform to a higher standard of quality, and to make it neutral in tone. (October 2010)
(This reply has also been copied to your talk page) - Hi! The problem with your article is that, despite your best efforts to market Ms Frazier's name across the internet, she is not yet encyclopaedically notable. This means that, as far as I can tell, she has not received significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Typically for singers this would include critical reviews of her music in reputable and independent music news sources, singles or albums that have charted on national charts, or coverage and interviews in the mainstream news. Wikipedia requires all article content to be able to be sourced to such independent coverage in reliable sources. Ask.com, Facebook, lyrics databases, and fansites are not reliable sources. If you can identify to me significant coverage in reliable sources, I would be happy to use it to improve the article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 21:45, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you DFW for your reply. Will try to explain the situation.
Lengthy explanation
LaGaylia is a very popular artist in Sweden with numerous Tv appearances and many interviews through the years in Sweden. This is not so important though. What LaGaylia and I want is the Wikipedia content to be as neutral and factual as possible. For promoting LaGaylia we have many other means of communication and it is not our ambition to promote her as an artist on Wikipedia. However, the current and far too longwinded version (in bad English as well) does not meet Wikipedia's standard. Even Wikipedia has reacted to the current and long version with a posted message on top, saying it needs to be changed to promote neutral content etc. It also contains false information such as: LaGaylia's name which according to the current version is her artist name - NOT TRUE - she was baptized LaGaylia). Also, the current version has a general tone of a biography rather than a Wikipedia factual content. The current version mostly contains facts that someone has copied from LaGaylia's website (that I have written!). I thought Wikipedia prefers a factual and neutral approach. All facts and content in our version is researchable on the web. Pls note that we have wanted to keep the English Wikipedia version exactly as the Swedish. The Swedish version has never been deleted or requested. Therefore, please read below the content LaGaylia and I find so much more reliable, factual and neutral + equivalent to the Swedish Wikipedia version. Will you please assist in letting us keeping her Wikipedia the correct way by submitting this content (see below), and not let someone jump in and delete it:
_________________________________________________________________________
LaGaylia Frazier, born on the 16th of February 1961 in Florida, USA, is an American singer who moved to Sweden in 2001. Since 2008 she is a Swedish citizen. She is the daughter of the American singer Hal Frazier.
EUROVISION SONG CONTEST [edit]
She participated twice in the Swedish competition to the Eurovision Song Contest. In 2004 with "It's In The Stars" she came number 5 in the quarter final. In 2005 with a power ballad "Nothing At All", she did not enter the final but went straight to the Second Chance and finished with just a difference of 1.127 telephone votes against another singer (LaGaylia got over 53.000 votes that night).
In 2008 LaGaylia Frazier participated in the Romanian national selection to the Eurovision Song Contest with the song "Dr. Frankenstein". She made it to the final where she came number 9 with 174 points. [1].
APPEARANCES [edit]
In July 2008 LaGaylia Frazier won the Baltic Song Contest in the Baltic Festival in Karlshamn, Sweden, with her own composition
"Over and Over Again".
At a jazz concert with Jan Lundgren's Trio at the Jazz Museum in Strömsholm, she received the 2010 'Anita O'Day Award'.
LaGaylia is a frequent guest in Swedish television. Other appearances include, among others, the Stockholm Jazz Festival, a tour with Putte Wickman, Robert Wells "Rhapsody in Rock" concerts etc. LaGaylia has toured with her soul / funk band in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Since 2010 LaGaylia collaborates with jazz pianist Jan Lundgren and his Trio.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Reply - Look, the problem is not with the truth of the article content, but rather than you can't prove the truth, because you are unable to provide links to it being reported in reliable independent sources. You MUST provide such sources for the information to appear on Wikipedia, otherwise (a) the subject is not notable (see our policy on notability) and (b) the article content is not verifiable (see our policy on verifiability). I don't want you to tell me what should be in ther article. I want you to link me to reliable independent sources which could be used to build a verifiable article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK - so where are the reliable sources to be found in the content we are not happy about?
I can't detect any links to reliable independent sources? Or if there are those links, pls advise where to find them in existing version and how to get them in there for me to add to my editied version. Thankx
Choconights (talk) 00:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's exactly the problem - there ARE no reliable sources in the content. Or for that matter any sources whatsoever. You need to find them. What you need are web links to coverage of Ms Frazier in reliable sources (eg independent and reputable music news, mainstream TV or printed news, national music charts). If you have such links, please provide them to me or add them to the article. If you don't then there's nothing that can be done - not every singer is encyclopaedically notable and it may be that Ms Frazier is just not at that stage in her career yet. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Really appreciate your help DFW!
Below is the same article content I sent you y-day - but this time with links to reliable sources.
Lengthy post
Would you be so kind and help me to get it in there. Hopefully it'll stay - or will someone try to replace this reliable version?
Best regards, Choconights
here it comes:
LaGaylia Frazier, born on the 16th of February 1961 in Florida, USA, is an American singer who moved to Sweden in 2001. Since 2008 she is a Swedish citizen. She is the daughter of the American singer Hal Frazier – www.imdb.come/name/nm166044/bio www.halfrazier.com
EUROVISION SONG CONTEST [edit]
She participated twice in the Swedish competition to the Eurovision Song Contest. In 2004 with "It's In The Stars" she came number 5 in the quarter final. In 2005 with a power ballad "Nothing At All", she did not enter the final but went straight to the Second Chance and finished with just a difference of 1.127 telephone votes against another singer (LaGaylia got over 53.000 votes that night). www.lionheart-int.com/lagaylia
In 2008 LaGaylia Frazier participated in the Romanian national selection to the Eurovision Song Contest with the song "Dr. Frankenstein". She made it to the final where she came number 9 with 174 points. [1]. www.lionheartmusic.se/news
APPEARANCES [edit]
In July 2008 LaGaylia Frazier won the Baltic Song Contest in the Baltic Festival in Karlshamn, Sweden, with her own composition "Over and Over Again".
www.blt.se/nyheter/ostersjofestivalen/la-gaylia-vann-baltic-song-contest
At a jazz concert with Jan Lundgren's Trio at the Jazz Museum in Strömsholm, she received the 2010 'Anita O'Day Award'. www.vlt.se/kulturnoje/1.887672-jazzmuseet-prisar-lagaylia-frazier
LaGaylia is a frequent guest in Swedish television. Other appearances include, among others, the Stockholm Jazz Festival in 2004 www.lionheart-int.com/lagaylia.asp , a tour with Putte Wickman – www.svd.se/kulturnoje/scen/stralande-musikfest-for-80-arig-jubilar_29717.svd , Robert Wells "Rhapsody in Rock" concerts – www.rhapsodyinrock.se/sv/nyheter.html etc. LaGaylia has toured with her soul / funk band in 2007, 2008 and 2009 – www.flen.se/templates/page.aspx?id=15574 . Since 2010 LaGaylia collaborates with jazz pianist Jan Lundgren and his Trio – www.jazzklubben.nu/mandagsjazz.htm .
’’’MUSIC’’’
In 1994 LaGaylia entered the US Billboard Dance/Club Play Songs with a re-mix of the soundtrack ”Shower me with Love” where she reached a #12 position for more than 2 months – www.pse-pas.com/pas/lagaylia.htm Her debut album ”Uncovered” was released in 2007 on her independent label TBG (That Black Girl) - www.ostlendingen.no/kultur/lagaylia-1.4543361
No, you're still not there. IMDB is not a reliable source, as it's user edited with no editorial control. The "Lionheart" address you use above returns a "page does not exist" when I try to use it, the Jazzklubben link does not mention Ms Frazier, and as far as I can tell Ostlendingen is just a (large) blog and is not a reliable source. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Can you help me with a Swedish-speaking new user?
Hi! Have read thru what you and User:Choconights have written on each other's talk pages and dont think its a language barrier, of what i can read she/he understands you quite well regarding sources and notability, however while reading thru what been said/written, i have gain the feeling that its rather a case of spreading the knowledge about LaGaylia Frazier and provide her with more attention, say like a fan page to some extent. I might be completly wrong, however it is the feeling i get by reading thru what have been said/written. --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 17:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Another Anglesey church...
Well, at least you found fewer points in this review than the last one... How's this? (I took it out of the lead because it got too messy to try and explain it there as well...) Thanks for the review: I'm going to have start writing some more articles, or I'll run out of GANs! BencherliteTalk00:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That looks fine. I note that you took some of my points from the last GAR I ran and applied them to your other articles, which is largely why I found less things this time - you'd already fixed them! A bit busy with something else right now but I'll come back and formalise the promotion later today. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; I'm doing my best to incorporate the best of the GA review suggestions in my past and present articles, so hopefully there'll be fewer problems each time you review one - as I've got 50 or so to write, and 60 or so to get through GA, I've got a while yet! Regards, BencherliteTalk02:55, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Humour on Wikipedia is a sticky tarpit; better men than me have waded in and been swallowed whole, preserved for later generations who will display them in museums and poke them with sticks. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Would appreciate some help with page deletion conflict
Hello DustFormWords,
I am hoping you can assist us with the situation that we have been having with our Company pages that we have been trying to post over the past couple of months.
We have tried over time to comply with guidelines and policies of Wikipedia and keep our company pages 'unbiased' and non promotional, but we have been unsuccessful with all of our attempts at getting our content approved and our edits keep getting reverted to the version that is not fully representative of our school.
We are a recognized educational institution, so it is important for us to be properly represented on Wikipedia.
Can you please help?
````Newbieinoakville
Reply - Hi there. You have three major problems:
(1) You are clearly a person associated with the college, who has made few other edits to Wikipedia other than this article. While there is not, in principle, any problem with a person adding accurate, well-sourced information to Wikipedia about a topic they are associated with, our general experience is that about 90% of such contributions are unsourced, false, or blatantly intended as advertising, so we look very suspiciously at such edits and apply a very high standard of auditing to them. This is not, as such, your fault, but it is the environment you are operating in. Ideally you would not need to update this page because you would be able to provide evidence of significant coverage of the institution in a reliable independent source (eg a newspaper) via a comment on the talk page, and uninvolved editors could use that to improve the article.
(2) The edits you are making are promotional in tone. Encyclopaedias are not interested in giving accolades to individuals or companies - they are merely interested in reporting the facts. Phrasings like "through the leadership of" are not generally encyclopaedic language and will usually lead to a revert on the grounds of promotional tone. An encyclopaedic version would be "Institution X was established by Person Y" or "Person Y was the founding CEO of Institution X."
(3) - and this is your biggest obstacle - all information on Wikipedia must be verifiable. (Click on that word to see our relevant policy.) This means that it MUST be capable of being confirmed by an independent, reliable source - that is to say, NOT your company's official website, NOT its press releases, NOT its Facebook page or Twitter account, and NOT an advertising piece from an industry magazine. Each and every fact must be mentioned in an independent, reliable source - eg a reputable newspaper - and then you must provide the DETAILS of that source via a reference in the article. See also our policies on reliable sources and on citation.
I hope you find this helpful. Please understand that the purpose of Wikipedia is not to advertise your company, or even provide accurate information about your company, but merely to summarise in an encyclopaedic way what reliable sources have said about your company. The best way to get better coverage on Wikipedia is to get more reliable sources to write about your company. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reply -- Thank you for your feedback. It is definitely insightful, as we are fairly new to the Wikipedia community and have tried hard to comply with required policies. Obviously, our intent is not to make this material promotional in nature and as an educational institution we want to make sure that we are properly reflected. So, I would really appreciate some insight into what we may need to do to rectify the situation. Should we look for experienced wikipedia contributors to assist us with this and if yes, where would we look. Your help is really valued and appreciated.
02:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Newbieinoakville
Hi. The best long term advice is to try working on some article you're not connected to, to get some practice with how Wikipedia works without being personally invested in the results. Maybe pick a notable person in your local area who doesn't yet have an article and who you're not connected to, and start an article for them. (See Wikipedia's policies on notability.) In the short term there are several ways to get other editors to work on the article for you:
(1) Find coverage in reliable, independent sources, and post links to that coverage on the article's Talk Page (the tab that says "Talk" or "Discussion" at the top of the article). This will let other editors who are already watching the article use the sources to improve the article. This isn't always successful as editors may not like your sources, or may be too busy elsewhere to work on this article.
(2)Use Wikipedia's Bounty Board. This allows you to post work you would like to see done (providing it complies with our content policies) and if an editor does the work you then make a donation of real money to the Wikimedia Foundation. You should read the policies surrounding use of that board very carefully before using it.
(3)Find a Wikipedia Project that covers your article (maybe WikiProject Schools) and place a request for help on their talk page. Not all WikiProjects are active and, again, Wikipedia being an organisation of volunteers, there is no guarantee someone will help you or respond.
Lastly, there is another strategy that may help you. While you may be having difficulty adding correct information, any editor is welcome to remove WRONG information. If there is inaccurate information on the article which is not attributed to a reliable source, you may delete it from the article and include the edit summary "contested fact - please provide a source". The information (in theory) may not be re-added without a citation from a reliable source. In this way you can either ensure there are no inaccuracies in the article or, better yet, make anyone who disagrees with you improve the article through finding sources themselves. Hope this helps. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:59, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your insights. They are definitely helpful. We will need to find some credible contributors/editors to help us edit our pages, I would think, as we really do not have qualified resources to do so in a way that would be acceptable to the wikipedia community. If you have any recommendations to where we may be able to find such resources, it would be appreciated. 03:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Newbieinoakville
Congratulations!
You've won a Wikimedia t-shirt (not this t-shirt, but an equally lovely t-shirt) as part of the Great Backlog Drive. Thank you for your hard work and perseverance and we hope to see you next week!
Greetings. I remember you were bold and removed the template from the Fighting Fantasy article, which I agreed with. I'd now like your thoughts on a template at The Warlock of Firetop Mountain (video game), which another user insists is relevant. Peronally, I can't see it as half of the games have no link and the game designers themselves barely rate a mention at their Wikipedia page, which is essentially a list. Surely this is unnecessary? Thebladesofchaos (talk) 12:18, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to briefly let you know I appreciated your retraction at my RfA. It does mean something to me, and simultaneously says something about you. Cheers. SnottyWongprattle05:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. It doesn't look like the RfA is going to pass at this stage anyway, but I didn't want it to go down with a vote on it that I wasn't going to be happy with a month from now. Seriously, if you can be as polite and level-headed for the next few months as you have been while the RfA's been running (a particularly stressful process) I'd have no trouble vocally advocating for you when you reapply. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My Wikipedia time said we were well into 1 March. Not sure what time zone I have it set to; it's certainly not my local time. Probably just as well because apparently the drive isn't taking quickfails anyway. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have replied there; I believe the answer is no, I haven't, in that the capture point for reviews must logically be the end, not the beginning, but I'll be guided by community consensus at that discussion. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Assess the edit, not the editor
DustFormsWords, you've reverted some of my recent edits, referring to me not seeming to understand policy. I'd advise you to review my edits, and not me as an editor. It could be argued whether Flash Element TD has enough coverage to meet the notability guidelines (which explicitly state that significant coverage is needed), but proposing the article's deletion is obviously not a question of me misunderstanding the guidelines. Filibusti (talk) 04:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also for the Don't Look Back article, I asked whether the coverage was significant enough to warrant notability/inclusion, yet you reverted my notability-tag, again citing my supposed lack of comprehension of the guidelines. Filibusti (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Flaah Element TD has a review on Jay Is Games. That's sufficient coverage to pass WP:N all by itself, and it doesn't appear that you've conducted good faith searches as required by WP:BEFORE, as several more immediately appear on even a cursory Google search. Don't Look Back is an award winning game by an award winning creator covered on Kotaku, Jay Is Games, Destructoid, and IGN, among others, where once again you don't appear to have conducted any searches yourself. I specifically mean that you misunderstand the meaning of "significant coverage" in WP:N, and your personal obligations per WP:BEFORE. But I've responded more generally on your talk page.- DustFormsWords (talk) 04:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think we have differing opinions of what constitutes significant coverage then! I wouldn't claim you have misunderstood the guidelines because of this as you have done though, that's simply insulting.
Let's take a look at the wording in WP:Notability though. ""Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail [...] Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention" (my bolding, of course). What is a trivial mention? I'd say a short blog post on the topic that doesn't go into much detail of the game. The JayIsGames review does however go into detail, but it's also mentioned in the notability guidelines that the sources used to establish notability must be reliable sources. JayIsGames is a blog - I'm sure it's the major news source for people interested in casual games, but popularity alone does not mean it's a reliable source. It's certainly NOT a mainstream news source - it's still a blog, albeit a high-traffic one. It's run by a man without any education in journalism or publishing, and I would guess the majority of the reviewers likewise lack any formal education in journalism. We also know nothing of their editorial policies. Do we have any well-established reliable sources covering them in detail? Not that I can find.
Saying a game is award-winning means nothing. Is the award itself even notable? Does it have an article on Wikipedia? Was it covered in mainstream news, more than in passing? Additionally, saying that Gregory Weiss has made award-winning games means nothing. If the game is notable, it should have an article, but if there are no RS covering the author in detail, then he himself does not meet the notability guidelines set forth in WP:BIO. Filibusti (talk) 05:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, none of the above has anything to do with our policies. Whether an award has an article on Wikipedia has nothing to do with whether it's a notable award, or whether it's useful in determining notability. Whether a site is a blog has nothing to do with whether it's a reliable source (in this case it's a blog with editorial oversight, and the community consensus is it's reliable). "Mainstream" has no meaning on Wikipedia, and it has nothing to do with "reliable" (plenty of mainstream sites have been deemed non-reliable by the community, and vice versa). Your definition of a trivial mention isn't relevant; we already have one, and it means a mention containing sufficient detail to be of any use in building an encyclopaedic article. Dedicated reviews are always non-trivial, as the opinion of the reviewer is itself a fact relevant to be mentioned in a "reception" section. PLEASE read our policies. Some of the relevant policies are WP:N (notability), WP:RS (reliable sources), WP:V (verifiability), and WP:BEFORE (obligations on nominator prior to nomination for deletion). I don't want to get unnecessarily snippy, and heaven knows I'm not the final arbiter of what's right and wrong on Wikipedia, but it's becoming increasingly clear that you know enough about Wikipedia to find the deep end and enthusiastically jump in, but not quite enough to swim there. Deletion and notability are two of the most complex policy areas on Wikipedia. You obviously have something relevant to say in this area, that Wikipedia deserves to get to hear, but can I suggest that you start the debate on just one or two articles - on their talk pages, so everyone can participate - and if you're successful there, take what you've learned and apply it to three or four more. If you start a notability discussion on the talk pages of (say) Flash Element TD I would love to join in, but the creator and editors of that article will likely also have something to say. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or, look, better yet - pick one (say Flash Element TD) and take it to AfD. Or if you don't know how I'm happy to do it on your behalf. You'll get the chance to put your argument to a wide audience, you'll get the views of many editors experienced in deletion and notability policy, and in the event that I'm wrong you get to dress me down in public, and I learn something too. Plus it's a final arbiter; you don't have to reargue it again somewhere else later. I think that's probably faster and more valuable than you and I going back and forth over this. - DustFormsWords (talk) 05:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're turning increasingly rude. I have no desire to "dress you down in public" nor do I have an exebitionist tendencies requiring a "wide audience". I have read the policies, but you seem to know them by heart rather than actually having looked at them now in conjunction with what I wrote (you say ""Mainstream" has no meaning on Wikipedia" - yet "mainstream news source" was something I quoted from the notability guideline page, so apparently it does have meaning on Wikipedia). I quote policy several times, but I have no idea what you base your arguments on so it's hard to argue with you (the community has come to a census that JayIsGames is an RS? you have a definition of "trivial" other than the one mentioned on the notability page? etc). Referring me to the very pages I quote, without actually quoting what it is you suggest I've misunderstood is entirely unhelpful.
"Whether an award has an article on Wikipedia has nothing to do with whether it's a notable award, or whether it's useful in determining notability" - I do agree, but that was ONE of the things I mentioned, where the argument was that the fact that he's won some award, by itself, of course doesn't mean a thing unless it's a notable, verifiable award. I'm sad that you'd pounce on that as it must have been apparent what I was trying to say, and that you of course actually agree to it. Filibusti (talk) 05:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd appreciate if you argued by using the policies, as I have to you, rather than proclaiming time after time that this is obviously too complex for me. It only comes off as arrogant and doesn't help the discussion. Filibusti (talk) 05:59, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The policies are there for you to read them, and if you want further elaboration you should maybe look over past AfD debates of similar articles. I don't intend to have three or four separate deletion and notability debates on my talk page, and nothing productive would come of it if I did. I'm not intending to be rude, and I reaffirm again that you're clearly a constructive and intelligent editor acting in good faith, but I do think that you're misguided as to notability and deletion policy. I don't think we're going to get anywhere arguing directly, and I don't think either of us will learn anything of lasting value for it. Consider me objecting to any indie games article you PROD on your current understanding of policy; this means that no PROD you make will be uncontroversial, leaving your only option being to take them to AfD. Pick an article you have notability concerns about (I think Flash Element TD is probably your strongest argument) and take it to AfD, or ask me to do it. I'm prepared to believe that Wikipedia benefits no matter what outcome results from that, and you get the benefit of either learning where you're wrong, or learning that you're not wrong at all. If you don't want to go to AfD, then please concede that your arguments wouldn't fly there and stop raising notability concerns. (To be clear, I DON'T advocate backing off - I think your arguments are worth putting and discussing, and that AfD is a reasonable and constructive way forward.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, if your main concern is just that JayIsGames is not a reliable source, you can settle that globally at the reliable sources noticeboard, which is a much more productive path than just tagging articles that rely on it. I've already done a search to see if it's been discussed before and I didn't find anything; that would generally mean there's not even a shred of community doubt it's an RS but you're free to take the alternative interpretation. Either way if you raise it there you may be able to get a definitive answer. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"I've already done a search to see if it's been discussed before and I didn't find anything; that would generally mean there's not even a shred of community doubt it's an RS but you're free to take the alternative interpretation" - come on, that must the most bizarre interpretation of this possible. By the same logic, any site not mentioned there is 100% definitely an RS. Besides, a second ago, the consensus was that it's an RS, then you look to see if there's actually any consensus, but there's none, so that means there's a solid water-tight consensus. I will do as you suggested though, and thank you for pointing out that course of action. Filibusti (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(unindenting) As I said, I have read the guidelines and I don't see what it is of them you're suggesting I'm violating. You say neither of us could learn anything from this, but I think you're wrong - if I indeed am wrong about something, I'd honestly be more than happy to learn about it but your unlinked, apocryphal references do little to help me. And to give a concrete example for yourself, you suggested "mainstream news source" has no meaning on Wikipedia, but I hope you might have learned otherwise looking at the actual guideline that I quoted.
I also want to object what to appears to be an undue bias on your part. You say you will object any prod on an indie game from me - suggesting the prods I've made on non-indie games and other things are fine. You seem to care for the indie game community, and this seems to have clouded your judgment.
If you refuse to even debate with me and insist on opposing my prods not based on the notability of the articles but solely on the topic they happen to belong to, I'd be happy if you'd take the following articles to AfD: Gregory Weir, Anna Anthropy, Kyratzes, the Museum of Broken Memories, and yeah, the Flash TD one. Filibusti (talk) 06:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take the Flash TD one to AfD; if I understand you correctly, the concerns are largely the same across all five articles (notability, as determined by sources, with the complaint being a lack of independent non-blog sources) so I'm not sure we'd benefit from five identical discussions. It is, of course, your right to take the remainder to AfD in your own capacity. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The concerns are different for the indie game authors because they are living persons and need to adhere to WP:BIO. Also, if we're talking about what is a strong case, I think the case for keeping the games are debatable, while the authors definitely fail the guidelines. If we're talking about the games, there's the argument that JIG is an RS. But what's the argument for keeping the authors? Filibusti (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I'll AfD one of the creators too. I'd think Anna Anthropy is the more arguably non-notable, but then I'm the creator of the original Gregory Weir article. Which would you prefer to argue first? - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Either one is fine, but what's your motive behind doing one at a time? Are you saying inclusion of one must naturally mean the other one should be included too, or vice versa? I think that can be argued for the games if they are all hinging on JIG being an RS or not, but if we're talking about the authors, both fail to meet WP:BIO in their own ways (I mean, the sources aren't the same). If an interview with Weir from the New York Times suddenly appears after a lengthy google, I'd say that means his article should definitely be kept (just like I think Jonatan Söderström's should be) but I don't see how that means squat to the Anna Anthropy article. Filibusti (talk) 06:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My motives for doing one at a time are that they're likely to turn on the same issues (reliability of sources, quantity of coverage, notable awards, inherited notability), that multiple nominations of similar articles at the same time polarises debate and reduces collegiate spirit, and that it does no service to the articles or the editors to have the same argument in two places. It may be that if the result on one is Keep, you will be persuaded that the other should also be Kept, and either way you're still welcome to nominate the second either now or at a later date. I think your stronger argument is Anna so I will nominate that, and then you're welcome to do the other yourself if you feel so inclined. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But isn't that true for nearly all AfD's? (I understand I'm free to nominate it myself, just arguing because I think your reasoning is wrong. Feel free to ignore me if you wish).Filibusti (talk) 06:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While there may be different issues applying to these articles (as you rightly point out, a NY Times interview would be definitively "Keep" for Gregory Weir but would not help Anna Anthropy) they also share a great number of issues in common that largely go to the notability of indie game developers and the usability of the sources that cover them. While the debate may not turn on a shared characteristic, it has a much larger-than-average chance that it will. I mean, my argument (which may have to wait till the morning until I post it) is that the sources in the articles already are sufficient to satisfy WP:N, and if you shoot me down on that for Anna Anthropy it seems likely I'll fail at Gregory Weir too. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because I have noticed you commenting at the current RfC regarding Pending Changes, I wanted to invite you to the IRC channel for pending changes. If you are not customarily logged into the IRC, use this link. This under used resource can allow real time discussion at this particularly timely venture of the trial known as Pending Changes. Even if nothing can come from debating points there, at least this invitation is delivered with the best of intentions and good faith expectations. Kind regards. My76Strat08:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if I told you, at one time I did intend; You have the most interesting username I have ever encountered on Wikipedia! Bravo for a top achievement. I was once known as Dust et al, on another site, which of course is dust and other things, but when dust forms words, it really is profound. Please accept my highest accolade; My admiration! My76Strat (talk) 07:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
GA Review for The Truth According to Wikipedia
Perhaps you could please have another look at this? It appears that during my absence, another helpful editor or two actually did come by and made many of your multiple helpful recommended changes. I have implemented some of your other helpful suggestions, as well. ;) Perhaps it is ready for GA? Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mugdha Vaishampayan (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Schmidt,MICHAEL Q.09:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You became involved in my rant about this. The reviewer says he has asked for a second opinion (not sure where, or how). So it leaves the field open for me to accept the offer made on MF's talk page to have a look at it. I'm prepared to join in a discussion to improve the article, but I will not (as I guess you have discovered) accept reformatting without discussion first! It should not need too much copyediting, as it has already been through the hands of MF for this. If you want to have a go, I should be very pleased. Any reply can be made here, as I shall be watching. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think you were mistaken in this edit. Linking to the disambiguation page is incorrect because it does not provide the reader with any information relevant to the context in which the link appears. See WP:DPL. Providing a red link at least informs other editors that there may be a need for a new article to be written, unless the architect is not a notable individual, in which case the link should simply be deleted. Linking to the disambiguation creates the incorrect impression that Wikipedia has an article about this person when in fact it doesn't. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, we would like to take the time and thank you for your contributions made as part of the March 2011 Good articles backlog elimination drive. Awards and barnstars will go out shortly for those who have reviewed a certain number of articles.
During the backlog drive, in the month of March 2011,
522 GA nominations were undertaken.
423 GA nominations passed.
72 GA nominations failed.
27 GA nominations were on hold.
We started the GA backlog elimination drive with 378 GA nominations remaining, with 291 that were not reviewed at all. By 2:00, April 1, 2011, the backlog was at 171 GA nominations, with 100 that were left unreviewed.
At the start of the drive, the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 101 days (Andrei Kirilenko (politician), at 20 November 2010, reviewed and passed 1 March 2011); at the end of the drive the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 39 days (Gery Chico, at 24 February 2011, still yet to be reviewed as of this posting).
While we did not achieve the objective of getting the backlog of outstanding GA nominations down to below 50, we reduced the GA backlog by over half. The GA reviews also seemed to be of a higher quality and have consistently led, to say the least, to marginal improvements to those articles (although there were significant improvements to many, even on the some of the nominations that were failed).
The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.
Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here. Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:17, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Had you noticed this has reopened? I only did today. I stopped looking in after discussion faded away. Now I've put it on my watchlist. I've just checked and find the preceding one was opened just over two years ago and has still not been closed and archived. Peter jackson (talk) 14:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
would be grateful for help in reviewing my article
Hi, I'm new to Wiki and have just written my first article. I would appreciate some coaching in ensuring it meets Wiki guidelines. I wondered if you might be willing to help? Sharadha Sharadha Bain (talk) 18:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hoping you might take a look at my "Ayurveda (Band)" page. It has been deleted once because it had too much fluff in it and it sounded like a fan page. Notability was also an issue.
I have since deleted what I thought might be considered fluff. With regard to notability, I disagree with that determination and am not sure how to argue it. Yes, the band is up and coming with a most favorable review of their latest CD by The Washington Post but more importantly they are well known and followed in the U.S. community of Nepalese and with music lovers in Nepal. There is a thriving music scene in Nepal. Diwas Gurung, lead guitarist for Ayurveda, was born and raised in Kathmandu. Before entering the states for college, he played in a favorite in-country band over there. His father, Om Gurung, is also a well known Nepali folk singer still living in Nepal.
Ayurveda is answering the call of their Nepali fanbase and will tour there and in India this October.
I guess my argument with regard to notability is that there seems to be some cultural elitism going on with deletions. What may not be notable in the states (just yet) can -- and in this case is -- notable in another country. Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world so their isn't a strong media base to build up "notability". Most of it is by word of mouth and internet searches. Music lovers in Nepal scramble for anything Ayurveda -- new music, videos, interviews, etc. I know that a Wikipedia article would be of great interest to them and to many other folks interested in the band, Nepali or not.
I hope I've made some sense here & would truly appreciate your feedback/assistance.
Hello! Not sure if you usually help with writing up articles. The Voices-Voix article was speedily deleted and I am needing someone to sponsor the article to avoid COI. Is this something you could do? The article is already written but of course, needs to be approved. If you are able to reply taljou42@gmail.com that would be great. Thanks for your time!
I noticed you are a participant of the WikiProject Quebec.
The Outline of Quebec was created a few days ago and is under vigorous development. It fills a gap in Wikipedia's set of outlines. It is the 3rd outline to date about a Canadian province/territory.
Once the Outline of Quebec is completed, it will provide an important example to others creating outlines for the remaining provinces and territories of Canada.
Please take a look at the outline to see if you can notice (and fill in) any missing topics. Pictures would also be nice (the rarer and the more interesting, the better).
The latest GOCE backlog elimination drive is under way! It began on 1 July and so far 18 people have signed up to help us reduce the number of articles in need of copyediting.
This drive will give a 50% bonus for articles edited from the GOCE requests page. Although we have cleared the backlog of 2009 articles there are still 3,935 articles needing copyediting and any help, no matter how small, would be appreciated.
We are appealing to all GOCE members, and any other editors who wish to participate, to come and help us reduce the number of articles needing copyediting, as well as the backlog of requests. If you have not signed up yet, why not take a look at the current signatories and help us by adding your name and copyediting a few articles. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words".
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their September 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy editing backlog. The drive will begin on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles in the backlog, as we want to copy edit as many of those as possible. Please consider copy editing an article that was tagged in 2010. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". See you at the drive! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters.
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their November 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles (and specifically will be targeting the oldest three months), as we want to copy edit as many of these as possible. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters.
Thanks for the link but frankly I think this sounds like a pretty awful idea. Wikipedia's problem is not that it has too few dispute resolution mechanisms which aren't visible enough, but rather that it has too many which are too visible, and which tend to suck in previously uninvolved editors and cause disputes to escalate. Best of luck though. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:09, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Something fishy in the poultry business
Hello,
My issue is with edits and deletes to an article. My father is trying to register a product in Egypt which has been blocked because of an article cited on wikipedia. The article concerns a specific compound http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanguinarine.
Here is the back story. My dad has been a salesman in the agri business for decades in the Middle East and North Africa. He worked for the big multinational firms, and sold all the nasty stuff organic farmers hate. Nothing glamorous, but it put me through college. The point is he knows how the business operates.
He is now semi-retired and consulting for a German firm which produces a natural anti-inflammatory drug that can reduce or eliminate the use of antibiotics. A good thing as I am told and a common practice in Europe which has stepped up legislation on antibiotics. However my father is trying to register the drug in Egypt, and the office is citing an article on Wikipedia as a reason to block it. Absurd.
A couple of bucks can go a long way in Egypt. As you can imagine the FDA would not cite wikipedia as a source to block or accept a drug! It appears some have taken a keen interest to make certain these drugs are described in scary language. They very well may be scary, but so are apple seeds, and it doesn't disqualify them from being beneficial.
This is not my field. I am an urban planner. I only happened to be in Dubai at the same time that my father had a meeting with technical staff. I learned the story over small talk. It's outrageous that people may be using wikipedia to block a product that may benefit the well-being of people and animals.
I don't know who is right for sure, but there is something fishy going on. My hope is to get the article independently written by an authority and to eliminate the back and forth editing. Apparently the technical staff at the office had no idea people could contact wikipedia for dispute resolution. Do you have any advice that I could pass along?
Thanks big time
Best,
Hi Bigzeez. Your problem is not with Wikipedia; your problem is with "the office" that is citing an article on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not an authoritative source on any topic; it merely cites authoritative sources. You should not be focusing on changing Wikipedia; you should be focusing on explaining that fact to "the office". I should say that the article in question looks reasonably factual and well-sourced - I can't see what in there could possibly alarm anyone. In regards to editing articles generally (and again, this is NOT the solution to your problem) it is not open to you to get articles "independently written by an authority". What you can do, though, is get an authority to publish information about the drug in a reliable source (say, a medical journnal, or agricultural magazine) and then cite that source in the Wikipedia article. To put it another way, it is often the case that people disagree with Wikipedia content. Wikipedia doesn't report the objective truth; it just reports the community consensus on the objective truth. If you don't agree with Wikipedia, you don't need to change Wikipedia, you need to change the consensus, and then cite sources documenting that consensus on Wikipedia. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:46, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Elections are currently underway for our third tranche of Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, 16 December – 23:59 UTC, 31 December. All GOCE members, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are five candidates vying for four positions. Your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.
We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2011. Read all about these in the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report.
Highlights
Membership grows to 764 editors, an increase of 261
Report on coordinators' elections
Around 1,000 articles removed through six Backlog elimination drives
I have received a notice that my article is up for Speedy Deletion because of a duplicate article.
My article is entitled and is about Hawaii Kotohira Jinsha - Hawaii Dazaifu Tenmangu.
The so-called duplicate page is entitled Dazaifu Tenmangu.
Dazaifu Tenmangu is in Japan (www.dazaifutenmangu.or.jp) .
Hawaii Kotohira Jinsha - Hawaii Dazaifu tenmangu is an independant entity established in Hawaii (www.e-shrine.org).
They are two entirely different things. My article is not a duplicate.
How do I go about contesting this for permanent resolution. Need your guidance.
My former article written in 2007, of the same name was also deleted due to blatant copyright infringement. Yes, it was from another webiste - but a website that I created and wrote. The narrative was of my writing and was explained as such. Unfortunately, despite contesting the claims, it was deleted.
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their March 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate the remaining 2010 articles from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, Stfg, and Coordinator emeritus SMasters. 19:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Participation:
We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
Progress report:
Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far.
Special thanks:
Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers.
Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months.
Progress report
During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here.
When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators.
Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May.
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg.
Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles.
Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg
Participation: Out of 54 people who signed up this drive, 32 copy-edited at least one article. Last drive's superstar, Lfstevens, again stood out, topping the leader board in all three categories and copy-editing over 700 articles. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: We were once again successful in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog—while removing 1166 articles from the queue, the second-most in our history. The total backlog currently sits at around 2600 articles, down from 8323 when we started out just over two years ago.
Coodinator election: The six-month term for our third tranche of Guild coordinators will be expiring at the end of June. We will be accepting nominations for the fourth tranche of coordinators, who will also serve a six-month term. Nominations will open starting on June 5. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their July 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on July 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on July 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to eliminate the articles tagged in April, May and June 2011 from the queue and to complete all requests placed before the end of June. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 6 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in April–June 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg.
Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 25 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—May, June, and July 2011—by about 40%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 264 articles so far, to around 2500 articles.
Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, your best copy-editing work of the month will be eligible for fabulous prizes! See here for details. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
Participation: Out of 45 people who signed up this drive, 31 have copy-edited at least one article. Lfstevens continues to carry most of the weight, having edited 360 articles and over a quarter of a million words already. Thanks to all who have participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, will be available early in August here.
Progress report: We are once again very close to achieving in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog. Only 35 such articles remain at press time. The total backlog currently sits at under 2400 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We are just two articles away from completing all requests made before July 2012 (both are in progress).
Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, you'll be able to submit your best copy-editing work for palaver, praise, and prizes. See here for details. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best August copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit the articles tagged longest ago and to complete all requests placed before the end of August. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top six in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". This drive features a much easier signup process. We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
The September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is now underway! The event runs until midnight September 30 (UTC). The goal is to copy edit articles with the oldest tags and complete all requests placed before September. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who participates, with special awards given to the top five in the following categories: "Total articles", "Total words", "Total articles over 5,000 words", "Total articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 19 have copy-edited at least one article, about the same as the last drive. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—August, September, and October 2011—by about 44%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 58 articles so far, to around 2600 articles. The biggest difference between this drive and the previous one is a stronger focus on large articles, so total word counts are still comparable.
Don't forget about the Copy Edit of the Month contests! Voting for the August contest has been extended through the end of the month. You don't have to make a submission to vote!
Participation: Out of 41 people who signed up this drive, 28 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing July, August, September and October 2011 from the backlog. This means that, for the first time since the drives began, the backlog is less than a year. At least 677 tagged articles were copy edited, although 365 new ones were added during the month. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2341 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 54 requests outstanding before September 2012 as well as eight of those made in September.
Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the August 2012 competition, and prizes will be issued soon. The September 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The October 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote.
The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best October copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
NEW!! In the week from Sunday 21 October to Saturday 27 October, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} belonging to selected project(s). For the first blitz, we'll start with WikiProject Olympics and WikiProject Albums and add more Projects to the blitz as we clear them. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded.
November 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in 2011 and to complete all requests placed before the end of October. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
Participation: Out of 31 people signed up for this drive so far, 22 have copy-edited at least one article. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive. We have reduced our target group of articles—November and December 2011—by over 50%, and 34 of the the 56 requests made in September and October this year have already been fulfilled. However, the rate of tagging for copy edit has increased, and this month we are just keeping the size of the backlog stable. So, all you copy editors, please do come along and help us!
Seasonal oversight: We had a slight fall from grace in the title of our last newletter, which mentioned the season in the northern hemisphere and thus got it wrong for the southern. Fortunately an observant GOCE member was ready to spring into action to advise us. Thanks! In future we'll stay meteorologically neutral.
Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 38 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy-edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. All the barnstars have now been distributed.
Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing November and December 2011 from the backlog. For the first time since the drives began, the backlog consists only of articles tagged in the current year. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2690 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 56 requests outstanding before November 2012 as well as eight of those made in November.
Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the October 2012 competition, and prizes have been issued. The November 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The December 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote.
Coodinator election: The six-month term for our fourth tranche of Guild coordinators will expire at the end of December. Nominations are open for the fifth tranche of coordinators, who will serve from 1 January to 30 June 2013. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.
The December 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best December copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
From Sunday 16 December to Saturday 22 December, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} from January 2012. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded.
January 2013 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in January, February, and March 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2012. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in January, February, and March 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
Coodinator election: Nominations are open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January to 30 June 2013. Nominations close on December 15 at 23:59 UTC, after which voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.
Participation: Out of 19 people who signed up for this blitz, 9 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: During the six-day blitz, we removed over twenty articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, BDD and Miniapolis.
Questions about adding "Garnet Capital Advisors" article
Hi,
I am trying to figure out the best way to go about having an organization, in this case Garnet Capital Advisors (which is mentioned in other Wikipedia articles such as "Loan Sale", "Mission Capital Advisors", etc. I feel as though it would be a great addition to Wikipedia and would like some advice as to best go about it because it seems as though doing it myself might create conflict of interest issues. Any advice/direction would be greatly appreciated.
Questions about adding "Garnet Capital Advisors" article
Hi,
I am trying to figure out the best way to go about having an organization, in this case Garnet Capital Advisors (which is mentioned in other Wikipedia articles such as "Loan Sale", "Mission Capital Advisors", etc. I feel as though it would be a great addition to Wikipedia and would like some advice as to best go about it because it seems as though doing it myself might create conflict of interest issues. Any advice/direction would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garnetcap2013 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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)
Participation: Out of 30 people who have signed up for this drive so far, 18 have participated. If you have signed up for the drive but have not yet participated, it isn't too late. If you haven't signed up for the drive, sign up now!
Progress report: Thus far we have reduced the number of May/June 2012 articles to just 124 articles, so we're on the right track. Unfortunately, for the first time in GOCE history, the number of articles in the backlog has actually gone up during this drive. While all participants are currently doing a fine job, we just don't have as many of them as we have had in the past. We have over 500 editors on our mailing list, but only 18 editors who have done a copy edit for the drive. If you're receiving this newsletter, it's because you have an interest in copy editing. Join the drive! Even if you only copy edit one article, it helps. Imagine how much progress we could make if everyone chipped in just one article.
Participation: Out of sixteen people who signed up for this blitz, nine copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Participation: Out of eleven people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
The December blitz ran from December 8–14. The theme for this blitz was articles tied in some way to religion. Seven editors knocked out 20 articles over the course of the week. Our next blitz will be in February, with a theme to be determined. Feel free to make theme suggestions at the Guild talk page!
The January 2014 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in October and November 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2013. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in October and November 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there!
Coordinator election: Voting is open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January through 30 June 2014. Voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.
Participation: Out of seven people who signed up for this blitz, all copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
The March 2014 backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles in need of copyediting. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copyedit all articles tagged in December 2012 and January 2013 and to complete all requests placed in January 2014. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copyedits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: number of articles, number of words, number of articles over 5,000 words, number of articles tagged in December 2012 and January 2013 and the longest article. We hope to see you there!
Participation: Thanks to all who participated in the drive and helped out behind the scenes. 42 people signed up for this drive and 28 of these completed at least one article. Final results are available here.
Progress report: Articles tagged during the target months of December 2012 and January 2013 were reduced from 177 to 33, and the overall backlog was reduced by 13 articles. The total backlog was 2,902 articles at the end of March. On the Requests page during March, 26 copy edit requests were completed, all requests from January 2014 were completed, and the length of the queue was reduced by 11 articles.
Participation: Out of 17 people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 51 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2,987 articles to 2,236 articles in May, the lowest backlog total since we began keeping records in 2009! Since at least 300 new articles were tagged during May, that means we copy edited over 1,000 articles in a single month. Amazing work, everyone!
Blitz: The June blitz will run from June 15–21. This blitz's theme is Politics. Sign up here.
Election: You can nominate yourself or others for the role of Coordinator for the second half of 2014 here. Nominations will be accepted until June 14. Voting will begin on June 15 and will conclude on June 28.
Participation: Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone!
Blitz: The August blitz will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's Requests page. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. Sign up here!
Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you.
Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in November's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 43 people who signed up for this drive, 26 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: The November Drive removed 26 requests from the Requests page and 509 articles from the {{copy edit}} backlog. We copy edited 83 articles tagged in the target months; July, August, and September 2013. Together with tag removals from articles unsuitable for copy editing, we eliminated July 2013 from the backlog and reduced August and September's tags to 61 and 70 respectively. As of 01:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC), the backlog stood at 1,974 articles, dipping below 2,000 for the first time in the Guild's history (see graph at right). Well done everyone!
Blitz: The December Blitz will run from December 14–20 and will focus on articles related to Religion, in recognition of this month's religious holidays in much of the English-speaking world. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. Sign up here!
Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from 1 January to 30 June 2015 is now underway. Candidates can nominate themselves or others from December 01, 00:01 (UTC), until December 15, 23:59. The voting period will run from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. You can read about coordinators' duties here. Please consider getting involved and remember to cast you vote—it's your Guild and it doesn't organize itself!
Thank you all once again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve anything without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the December Blitz. Of the 14 editors who signed up for the blitz, 11 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
January drive: The January backlog-reduction drive is just around the corner; sign up
here!
Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015 is now underway. The voting period runs from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. Please cast your vote—it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!
Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 38 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: We were able to remove August 2013 from the general copyediting backlog and November 2014 from the request-page backlog. Many thanks, everyone!
Blitz: The February Blitz will run from February 15–21 and again focuses on the requests page. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one request article. Sign up here!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 21 people who signed up, eight copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: The blitz removed 16 articles from the requests list, and we're almost done with December 2014. Many thanks, everyone!
Drive: The month-long March drive begins in about a week. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 38 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 19–25. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here!
May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in December 2013, January and February 2014 and all request articles, begins soon. Sign up now!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 38 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, and we got within 50 articles of our all-time low in the backlog. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Coordinator elections:
Nominations are open through June 15 for GOCE coordinators, with voting from June 16–30. Self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
July drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 24 people who signed up, 17 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
August blitz: The one-week April blitz, targeting biographical articles that have been tagged for copy editing for over a year, will run from August 16–22. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the article list on the blitz page. Sign up here!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, KieranTribe, Miniapolis, and Pax85.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello! I'm new to Wikipedia and have a few questions. I would really appreciate your assistance.
My class was recently given a project to create a Wiki page about our assigned topics. I was assigned to write about the newborn cub shown at the end of Disney's "The Lion King." The character is referenced on "The Lion King" Wiki page: "Rafiki presents Simba and Nala's newborn cub to the inhabitants of the Pride Lands."
I was wondering if this is an acceptable topic? I plan to discuss the backstory of the cub, providing information about the character's history in "The Lion King" franchise. Of course, I would also be citing official sources throughout the page. I just want to make sure I don't start my project and have the Wiki page deleted, especially since I'm not familiar with writing for the website just yet.
September drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 25 editors who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
October blitz: The one-week October blitz, targeting requests, has just concluded. Of the nine editors who signed up, seven copyedited at least one request; check your talk page for your barnstar!
The month-long November drive, focusing on our oldest backlog articles (June, July, and August 2014) and the October requests, is just around the corner. Hope to see you there!
March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 28 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 17–23. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here!
May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in March, April, and May 2015, and all request articles, begins May 1. Sign up now!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis, and Baffle gab1978.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello everyone, welcome to the June 2016 GOCE newsletter. It's been a few months since we sent one out; we hope y'all haven't forgotten about the Guild! Your coordinators have been busy behind the scenes as usual, though real life has a habit of reducing our personal wiki-time. The May backlog reduction drive, the usual coordinating tasks and preparations for the June election are keeping us on our toes!
May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's record-setting backlog reduction drive. Of the 29 people who signed up, 16 copyedited at least one article, 197 copyedits were recorded on the drive page, and the copyedit backlog fell below 1,500 for the first time! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz will occur from 12 June through 18 June; the themes will be video games and Asian geography.
Coordinator elections:
It's election time again; how quickly they seem to roll around! Nominations for the next tranche of Guild coordinators, who will serve a six-month term that begins at 00:01 UTC on 1 July and ends at 23:59 UTC on 31 December, opens at 00:01 UTC on 1 June and closes at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. Voting takes place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June. If you'd like to assist behind the scenes, please consider stepping forward; self-nominations are welcomed and encouraged. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; remember it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello everyone, and welcome to the July 2016 GOCE newsletter.
June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 12 through 18 June; the themes were video games and Asian geography. Of the 18 editors who signed up, 11 removed 47 articles from the backlog. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.
Coordinator elections:
The second tranche of Guild coordinators for 2016, who will serve a six-month term until 23:59 UTC on 31 December, have been elected.
Jonesey95 remains as your drama-free Lead Coordinator, and Corinne and Tdslk are your new assistant coordinators. For her long service to the Guild, Miniapolis has been enrolled in the GOCE Hall of Fame. Thanks to everyone who voted in the election; our next scheduled one occurs in December 2016. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.
July Drive:
Our month-long July Copy Editing Backlog Elimination Drive is now underway. Our aim is to remove articles tagged for copy-edit in April, May and June 2015, and to complete all requests on the GOCE Requests page from June 2016. The drive ends at 23:59 on 31 July 2016 (UTC).
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.
July Drive: The July drive was a roaring success. We set out to remove April, May, and June 2015 from our backlog (our 149 oldest articles), and by 23 July, we were done with those months. We added July 2015 (66 articles) and copy-edited 37 of those. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from June 2016. Well done! Overall, we recorded copy edits to 240 articles by 20 editors, reducing our total backlog to 13 months and 1,656 articles, the second-lowest month-end total ever.
August Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 21 through 27 August; the theme was sports-related articles in honor of the 2016 Summer Olympics. Of the eight editors who signed up, five editors removed 11 articles from the backlog. A quiet blitz – everyone must be on vacation. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.
Hello everyone, and welcome to the December 2016 GOCE newsletter. We had an October newsletter all set to go, but it looks like we never pushed the button to deliver it, so this one contains a few months of updates. We have been busy and successful!
Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: Nominations are open for election of Coordinators for the first half of 2017. Please visit the election page to nominate yourself or another editor, and then return after December 15 to vote. Thanks for participating!
September Drive: The September drive was fruitful. We set out to remove July through October 2015 from our backlog (an ambitious 269 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of oldest articles to just 83. We reduced our overall backlog by 97 articles, even with new copyedit tags being added to articles every day. We also handled 75% of the remaining Requests from August 2016. Overall, 19 editors recorded copy edits to 233 articles (over 378,000 words).
October Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 16 through 22 October; the theme was Requests, since the backlog was getting a bit long. Of the 16 editors who signed up, 10 editors completed 29 requests. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.
November Drive: The November drive was a record-breaker! We set out to remove September through December 2015 from our backlog (239 articles), and by the end of the month, we had cut that pile of old articles to just 66, eliminating the two oldest months! We reduced our overall backlog by 523 articles, to a new record low of 1,414 articles, even with new tags being added to articles every day, which means we removed copy-editing tags from over 800 articles. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from October 2016. Officially, 14 editors recorded copy edits to 200 articles (over 312,000 words), but over 600 articles, usually quick fixes and short articles, were not recorded on the drive page.
Housekeeping note: we do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your Watchlist.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk.
December blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 December; the themes were Requests and eliminating the November 2015 backlog. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine editors completed 29 articles. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all who took part.
January drive: The January drive was a great success. We set out to remove December 2015 and January and February 2016 from our backlog (195 articles), and by 22 January we had cleared those and had to add a third month (March 2016). At the end of the month we had almost cleared out that last month as well, for a total of 180 old articles removed from the backlog! We reduced our overall backlog by 337 articles, to a low of 1,465 articles, our second-lowest month-end total ever. We also handled all of the remaining requests from December 2016. Officially, 19 editors recorded 337 copy edits (over 679,000 words).
February blitz: The one-week February blitz, focusing on the remaining March 2016 backlog and January 2017 requests, ran from 12 to 18 February. Seven editors reduced the total in those two backlog segments from 32 to 10 articles, leaving us in good shape going in to the March drive.
Coordinator elections for the first half of 2017: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2017 were elected. Jonesey95 stepped aside as lead coordinator, remaining as coordinator and allowing Miniapolis to be the lead, and Tdslk and Corinne returned as coordinators. Thanks to all who participated!
Speaking of coordinators, congratulations to Jonesey95 on their well-deserved induction into the Guild of Copy Editors Hall of Fame. The plaque reads: "For dedicated service as lead coordinator (2014, 1 July – 31 December 2015 and all of 2016) and coordinator (1 January – 30 June 2015 and 1 January – 30 June 2017); exceptional template-creation work (considerably streamlining project administration), and their emphasis on keeping the GOCE a drama-free zone."
Housekeeping note: We do not send a newsletter before every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your watchlist.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdslk.
Hello, DustFormsWords. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello copy editors! Welcome to the December 2017 GOCE newsletter, which contains nine months(!) of updates. The Guild has been busy and successful; your diligent efforts in 2017 has brought the backlog of articles requiring copy edit to below 1,000 articles for the first time. Thanks to all editors who have contributed their time and energy to help make this happen.
Our copy-editing drives (month-long backlog-reduction drives held in odd-numbered months) and blitzes (week-long themed editing in even-numbered months) have been very successful this year.
March drive: We set out to remove April, May, and June 2016 from our backlog and all February 2017 Requests (a total of 304 articles). By the end of the month, all but 22 of these articles were cleared. Officially, of the 28 who signed up, 22 editors recorded 257 copy edits (439,952 words). (These numbers do not always make sense when you compare them to the overall reduction in the backlog, because not all editors record every copy edit on the drive page.)
April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 16 through 22 April; the theme was Requests. Of the 15 who signed up, 9 editors completed 43 articles (81,822 words).
May drive: The goals were to remove July, August, and September 2016 from the backlog and to complete all March 2017 Requests (a total of 300 articles). By the end of the month, we had reduced our overall backlog to an all-time low of 1,388 articles. Of the 28 who signed up, 17 editors completed 187 articles (321,810 words).
June blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 18 through 24 June; the theme was Requests. Of the 16 who signed up, 9 editors completed 28 copy edits (117,089 words).
2017 Coordinator elections: In June, coordinators for the second half of 2017 were elected. Jonesey95 moved back into the lead coordinator position, with Miniapolis stepping down to remain as coordinator; Tdslk and Corinne returned as coordinators, and Keira1996 rejoined after an extended absence. Thanks to all who participated!
July drive: We set out to remove August, September, October, and November 2016 from the backlog and to complete all May and June 2017 Requests (a total of 242 articles). The drive was an enormous success, and the target was nearly achieved within three weeks, so that December 2016 was added to the "old articles" list used as a goal for the drive. By the end of the month, only three articles from 2016 remained, and for the second drive in a row, the backlog was reduced to a new all-time low, this time to 1,363 articles. Of the 33 who signed up, 21 editors completed 337 articles (556,482 words).
August blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 20 through 26 August; the theme was biographical articles tagged for copy editing for more than six months (47 articles). Of the 13 who signed up, 11 editors completed 38 copy edits (42,589 words).
September drive: The goals were to remove January, February, and March 2017 from the backlog and to complete all August 2017 Requests (a total of 338 articles). Of the 19 who signed up, 14 editors completed 121 copy edits (267,227 words).
October blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 22 through 28 October; the theme was Requests. Of the 14 who signed up, 8 editors completed 20 articles (55,642 words).
November drive: We set out again to remove January, February, and March 2017 from the backlog and to complete all October 2017 Requests (a total of 207 articles). By the end of the month, these goals were reached and the backlog shrank to its lowest total ever, 997 articles, the first time it had fallen under one thousand (click on the graph above to see this amazing feat in graphical form). It was also the first time that the oldest copy-edit tag was less than eight months old. Of the 25 who signed up, 16 editors completed 159 articles (285,929 words).
2018 Coordinator elections: Voting is open for the election of coordinators for the first half of 2018. Please visit the election page to vote between now and December 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Thanks for participating!
Housekeeping note: We do not send a newsletter before (or after) every drive or blitz. To have a better chance of knowing when the next event will start, add the GOCE's message box to your watchlist.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Corinne, Tdslk, and Keira1996.
Welcome to the February 2018 GOCE newsletter in which you will find Guild updates since the December edition. We got to a great start for the year, holding the backlog at nine months. 100 requests were submitted in the first 6 weeks of the year and were swiftly handled with an average completion time of 9 days.
Coordinator elections: In December, coordinators for the first half of 2018 were elected. Jonesey95 remained as lead coordinator and Corrine, Miniapolis and Tdslk as assistant coordinators. Keira1996 stepped down as assistant coordinator and was replaced by Reidgreg. Thanks to all who participated!
End of year reports were prepared for 2016 and 2017, providing a detailed look at the Guild's long-term progress.
January drive: We set out to remove April, May, and June 2017 from our backlog and all December 2017 Requests (a total of 275 articles). As with previous years, the January drive was an outstanding success and by the end of the month all but 57 of these articles were cleared. Officially, of the 38 who signed up, 21 editors recorded 259 copy edits (490,256 words).
February blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 11 through 17 February, focusing on Requests and the last articles tagged in May 2017. At the end of the week there were only 14 pending requests, with none older than 20 days. Of the 11 who signed up, 10 editors completed 35 copy edits (98,538 words).
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Corinne, Tdslk, and Reidgreg.
Welcome to the June 2018 GOCE newsletter, in which you will find Guild updates since the February edition.
Progress continues to be made on the copyediting backlog, which has been reduced to 7 months and reached a new all-time low. Requests continue to be handled efficiently this year, with 272 completed by the end of May (an average completion time of 10.5 days). Fewer than 10% of these waited longer than 20 days, and the longest wait time was 29 days.
Wikipedia in general, and the Guild in particular, experienced a deep loss with the death on 20 March of Corinne. Corinne (a GOCE coordinator since 1 July 2016) was a tireless aide on the requests page, and her peerless copyediting is a part of innumerable GAs and FAs. Her good cheer, courtesy and tact are very much missed.
March drive: The goal was to remove June, July and August 2017 from our backlog and all February 2018 Requests (a total of 219 articles). This drive was an outstanding success, and by the end of the month all but eight of these articles were cleared. Of the 33 editors who signed up, 19 recorded 277 copy edits (425,758 words).
April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 15 through 21 April, focusing on Requests and the last eight articles tagged in August 2017. At the end of the week there were only 17 pending requests, with none older than 17 days. Of the nine editors who signed up, eight editors completed 22 copy edits (62,412 words).
May drive: We set out to remove September, October and November 2017 from our backlog and all April 2018 Requests (a total of 298 articles). There was great success this month with the backlog more than halved from 1,449 articles at the beginning of the month to a record low of 716 articles. Officially, of the 20 who signed up, 15 editors recorded 151 copy edits (248,813 words).
Coordinator elections: It's election time again. Nominations for Guild coordinators (who will serve a six-month term for the second half of 2018) have begun, and will close at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible, and self-nominations are encouraged. Voting will take place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June.
June blitz: Stay tuned for this one-week copy-editing blitz, which will take place in mid-June.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Corinne, Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tdslk.
Hello and welcome to the August 2018 GOCE newsletter. Thanks to everyone who participated in the Guild's June election; your new and returning coordinators are listed below. The next election will occur in December 2018; all Wikipedia editors in good standing may take part.
Our June blitz focused on Requests and articles tagged for copy edit in October 2017. Of the eleven people who signed up, eight editors recorded a total of 28 copy edits, including 3 articles of more than 10,000 words. Complete results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the seventeen people who signed up, thirteen editors completed 194 copy edits, successfully removing all articles tagged in the last three months of 2017. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are here.
The August blitz will run for one week, from 19 to 25 August. Sign up now!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.
Hello and welcome to the December 2018 GOCE newsletter. Here is what's been happening since the August edition.
Thanks to everyone who participated in the August blitz (results), which focused on Requests and the oldest backlog month. Of the twenty editors who signed up, eleven editors recorded 37 copy edits.
For the September drive (results), of the twenty-three people who signed up, nineteen editors completed 294 copy edits.
Our October blitz (results) focused on Requests, geography, and food and drink articles. Of the fourteen people who signed up, eleven recorded a total of 57 copy edits.
For the November drive (results), twenty-two people signed up, and eighteen editors recorded 273 copy edits. This helped to bring the backlog to a six-month low of 825 articles.
The December blitz will run for one week, from 16 to 22 December. Sign up now!
Elections: Nominations for the Guild's coordinators for the first half of 2019 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations, so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself!
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.
Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2018. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2019, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from all of the articles tagged in our original target months of June, July and August 2018, and by 24 January we ran out of articles. After adding September, we finished the month with 8 target articles remaining and 842 left in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 48 requests for copyedit in January. Of the 31 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 32 copyedits, including 15 requests. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: As of 23:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 108 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 851 articles.
March Drive: The month-long March drive is now underway; the target months are October and November 2018. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here!
Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2019. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below.
Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 16 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
June Blitz: Our June blitz will soon be upon us; it will begin at 00:01 on 16 June (UTC) and will close at 23:59 on 22 June (UTC). The themes are "nature and the environment" and all requests.
March Drive: Thanks to everyone for their work in March's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from 182 of the articles tagged in our original target months October and November 2018, and the month finished with 64 target articles remaining from November and 811 in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 22 requests for copyedit in March; the month ended with 34 requests pending. Of the 32 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
April Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the April Blitz; the blitz ran from 14 to 20 April (UTC) inclusive and the themes were Sports and Entertainment. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: As of 04:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 267 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 605 articles.
May Drive: During the May Backlog Elimination Drive, Guild copy-editors removed copyedit tags from 191 of the 192 articles tagged in our original target months of November and December 2018, and January 2019 was added on 22 May. We finished the month with 81 target articles remaining and a record low of 598 articles in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 24 requests for copyedit during the May drive, and the month ended with 35 requests pending. Of the 26 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2019.
June election: Reidgreg was chosen as lead coordinator, and is being assisted by Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk, and first-time coordinator Twofingered Typist. Jonesey95 took a respite after serving for six years. Thanks to everyone who participated!
June Blitz: From 16 to 22 June, we copy edited articles on the themes of nature and the environment along with requests. 12 participating editors completed 35 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
July Drive: The year's fourth backlog-elimination drive was a great success, clearing all articles tagged in January and February, and bringing the copy-editing backlog to a low of five months and a record low of 585 articles while also completing 48 requests. Of the 30 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, a participation level last matched in May 2015. Final results and awards are listed here.
August Blitz: From 18 to 24 August, we copy edited articles tagged in March 2019 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: As of 03:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 413 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stood at 599 articles, close to our record month-end low of 585.
Requests page: We are experimenting with automated archiving of copy edit requests; a discussion on REQ Talk (permalinked) initiated by Bobbychan193 has resulted in Zhuyifei1999 writing a bot script for the Guild. Testing is now underway and is expected to be completed by 3 October; for this reason, no manual archiving of requests should be done until the testing period is over. We will then assess the bot's performance and discuss whether to make this arrangement permanent.
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today!
Hello and welcome to the December 2019 GOCE newsletter, an update of Guild happenings since the September edition. Our Annual Report should be ready in late January.
Election time: Nominations for the election of a new tranche of Guild coordinators to serve for the first half of 2020 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself!
September Drive: Of the thirty-two editors who signed up, twenty-three editors copy edited at least one article; they completed 39 requests and removed 138 articles from the backlog, bringing the backlog to a low of 519 articles.
October Blitz: This event ran from 13 to 19 October, with themes of science, technology and transport articles tagged for copy edit, and Requests. Sixteen editors helped remove 29 articles from the backlog and completed 23 requests.
November Drive: Of the twenty-eight editors who signed up for this event, twenty editors completed at least one copy edit; they completed 29 requests and removed 133 articles from the backlog.
Our December Blitz will run from 15 to 21 December. Sign up now!
Progress report: From September to November 2019, GOCE copy editors processed 154 requests. Over the same period, the backlog of articles tagged for copy editing was reduced by 41% to an all-time low of 479 articles.
Request archiving: The archiving of completed requests has now been automated. Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 and Bobbychan193, YiFeiBot is now archiving the Requests page. Archiving occurs around 24 hours after a user's signature and one of the templates {{Done}}, {{Withdrawn}} or {{Declined}} are placed below the request. The bot uses the Guild's standard "purpose codes" to determine the way it should archive each request so it's important to use the correct codes and templates.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2019. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2020, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election results: There was little changeover in the roster of Guild Coordinators, with Miniapolis stepping down with distinction as a coordinator emeritus while Jonesey95 returned as lead coordinator. The next election is scheduled for June 2020 and all Wikipedians in good standing may participate.
January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work, completing 215 copy edits including 56 articles from the Requests page and 116 backlog articles from the target months of June to August 2019. At the conclusion of the drive there was a record low of 323 articles in the copy editing backlog. Of the 27 editors who signed up for the drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
February Blitz: Of the 15 editors who signed up for this one-week blitz, 13 completed at least one copy edit. A total of 32 articles were copy edited, evenly split between the twin goals of requests and the oldest articles from the copy-editing backlog. Full results are here.
March Drive: Currently underway, this event is targeting requests and backlog articles from September to November 2019. As of 18 March, the backlog stands at a record low of 253 articles and is expected to drop further as the drive progresses. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Help set a new record and sign up now!
Progress report: As of 18 March, GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests in 2020 and there was a net reduction of 385 articles from the copy-editing backlog – a 60% decrease from the beginning of the year. Well done and thank you everyone!
Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2020. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. All times and dates stated are in UTC.
Current events
Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 00:01 on 16 June. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought about helping out at the Guild, or you know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
March Drive: Self-isolation from coronavirus may have played a hand in making this one of our most successful backlog elimination drives. The copy-editing backlog was reduced from 477 to a record low of 118 articles, a 75% reduction. The last four months of 2019 were cleared, reducing the backlog to three months. Fifty requests were also completed, and the total word count of copy-edited articles was 759,945. Of the 29 editors who signed up, 22 completed at least one copy edit. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
April Blitz: This blitz ran from 12 to 18 April with a theme of Indian military history. Of the 18 people who signed up, 14 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed a total of 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
May Drive: This event marked the 10th anniversary of the GOCE's copy-editing drives, and set a goal of diminishing the backlog to just one month of articles, as close to zero articles as possible. We achieved the goal of eliminating all articles that had been tagged prior to the start of the drive, for the first time in our history! Of the 51 editors who signed up, 43 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Other news
Progress report: as of 2 June, GOCE participants had processed 328 requests since 1 January, which puts us on pace to exceed any previous year's number of requests. As of the end of the May drive, the backlog stood at just 156 articles, all tagged in May 2020.
Outreach: To mark the 10th anniversary of our first Backlog Elimination Drive, The Signpost contributor and GOCE participant Puddleglum2.0 interviewed project coordinators and copy-editors for the journal's April WikiProject Report. The Drive and the current Election of Coordinators have also been covered in The Signpost'sMay News and Notes page.
Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2020.
Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today!
Election reminder: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 December. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: An uncorrected typo (even copy editors make copy editing mistakes!) led to an eight-day "leap blitz" from 14 to 21 June, focusing on requests and articles tagged in May. 19 participating editors claimed 54 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
July Drive: Over 750,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event, keeping pace with the previous three self-isolated drives. Of the 38 people who signed up, 30 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.
August Blitz: From 16 to 22 August, we copy edited articles tagged in June and July 2020 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 37 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Baffle gab1978, Tdslk, Twofingered Typist, and first-time coordinator Puddleglum2.0. Reidgreg took a break after serving for a couple years. Thanks to everyone who participated!
Progress report: As of 01:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 532 requests since 1 January and there were 38 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above).
Election time: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before Auld Lang Syne. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
December Blitz: This will run from 13 to 19 December, and will target all Requests. Sign up now.
Drive and Blitz reports
September Drive: 67 fewer articles had copy-edit templates by this month's close. Of the 27 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and 124 articles were claimed for the drive.
October Blitz: this ran from 18 to 24 October, and focused on articles tagged for copy-edit in July and August 2020, and all Requests. Of the 13 who signed up, 11 editors copy-edited at least one article. 21 articles were claimed for the blitz.
November Drive: Of the 18 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and together claimed 134 articles. At the close of the drive, 67 fewer articles were in the backlog and we had dealt with 39 requests.
Other news
Progress report: As of 09:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 663 requests (18 from 2019) since 1 January and there were 52 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 494 (see monthly progress graph above).
Annual Report for 2020: this roundup of the year's activity at the Guild is planned for publication in late January or early February.
Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, our first newsletter of 2021, which is a brief update of Guild activities since December 2020. To unsubscribe, follow the link at the bottom of this box.
Current events
Election time: Voting in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 16 June and will conclude at the end of the month. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Have your say and show support here.
June Blitz: Our June copy-editing blitz is underway and will conclude on 26 June.
Drive and blitz reports
January Drive: 28 editors completed 324 copy edits totalling 714,902 words. At the end of the drive, the backlog had reached a record low of 52 articles. (full results)
Progress report: as of 26 June, GOCE participants had completed 343 Requests since 1 January. The backlog has fluctuated but remained in control, with a low of 52 tagged articles at the end of January and a high of 620 articles in mid-June.
Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2021.
Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today!
Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: From 20 to 26 June, 6 participating editors claimed 16 copy edits, focusing on requests and articles tagged in March and April. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
July Drive: Almost 575,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 24 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.
August Blitz: From 15 to 21 August, we copy edited articles tagged in April and May 2021 and requests. 9 participating editors completed 17 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.
New maintenance template added to our project scope: After a short discussion in June, we added {{cleanup tense}} to the list of maintenance templates that adds articles to the Guild's copy editing backlog categories. This change added 198 articles, spread over 97 months of backlog, to our queue. We processed all of those articles except for those from the three or four most recent months during the July backlog elimination drive (Here's a link to a "tense" discussion during the drive).
Progress report: As of 18:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 468 requests since 1 January and there were 60 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above).
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Election time: Our end-of-year election of coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before "Auld Lang Syne". Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.
December Blitz: We have scheduled a week-long copy-editing blitz for 12 to 18 December. Sign up now!
Drive and Blitz reports
September Drive: Almost 400,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 27 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.
October Blitz: From 17 to 23 October, we copy edited articles tagged in May and June 2021 and requests. 8 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
November Drive: Over 350,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 21 people who signed up, 14 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.
Other news
It is with great sadness that we report the death on 19 November of Twofingered Typist, who was active with the Guild almost daily for the past several years. His contributions long exceeded the thresholds for the Guild's highest awards, and he had a hand in innumerable good and featured article promotions as a willing collaborator. Twofingered Typist also served as a Guild coordinator from July 2019 to June 2021. He is sorely missed by the Wikipedia community.
Progress report: As of 30 November, GOCE copyeditors have completed 619 requests in 2021 and there were 51 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog stood at 946 articles tagged for copy-editing (see monthly progress graph above).
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the April newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2021.
Election results: Jonesey95 retired as lead coordinator. Reidgreg was approved to fill this role after an 18-month absence from the coordinator team, and Baffle gab1978 was chosen as an assistant coordinator following a one-year break. Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu continued on as long-standing assistant coordinators.
January Drive: Of the 22 editors who signed up, 16 editors claimed 146 copy edits including 45 requests. (details)
February Blitz: This one-week effort focused on requests and a theme of Africa and African diaspora history. Of the 12 editors who signed up, 6 editors recorded 21 copy edits, including 4 requests. (details)
March Drive: Of the 28 editors who signed up, 18 claimed 116 copy edits including 25 requests. (details)
April Blitz: This one-week copy editing event has been scheduled for 17–23 April, sign up now!
Progress report: As of 11 April, copy editors have removed approximately 500 articles from the backlog and completed 127 copy-editing requests during 2022. The backlog has been hovering at about 1,100 tagged articles for the past six months.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the June 2022 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since April 2022. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Blitz: of the 16 editors who signed up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, 12 completed at least one copy-edit, and between them removed 21 articles from the copy-editing backlog. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 27 editors signed up for our May Backlog Elimination Drive; of these, 20 copy-edited at least one article. 144 articles were copy-edited, and 88 articles from our target months August and September 2021 were removed from the backlog. Barnstars awarded are here.
Progress report: As of 07:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 209 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 1,404 articles.
Election news: Nominations for our half-yearly Election of Coordinators continues until 23:50 on 15 June (UTC), after which, voting will commence until 23:59, 30 June (UTC). All Wikipedians in good standing (active and not blocked, banned, or under ArbCom or community sanctions) are eligible and self-nominations are welcomed.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to our latest newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Drive: Of the 22 editors who signed up for our July Backlog Elimination Drive, 18 copy-edited, between them, 116 articles. Barnstars awarded are noted here.
Blitz: Participants in our August Copy Editing Blitz copy-edited 51,074 words in 17 articles. Of the 15 editors who signed up, 11 claimed at least one copy-edit. Barnstars awarded are noted here.
Blitz: Our October Copy Editing Blitz begins on 16 October at 00:01 (UTC) and will end on 22 October at 23:59 (UTC). Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 19:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 303 requests for copy edit – including withdrawn and declined ones – since 1 January. At the time of writing, there are 77 requests awaiting attention and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 1,759. We always need more active, skilled copyeditors – particularly for requests – so please get involved if you can.
Election news: In our mid-year election, serving coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tenryuu were returned for another term, and were joined by new coordinator Zippybonzo. No lead coordinator was elected for this half-year. Jonesey95, a long-serving coordinator and lead, was elected as coordinator emeritus; we thank them for their service. Thank you to everyone who took part. Our next election of coordinators takes place throughout December. If you'd like to help out at the GOCE, please consider nominating yourself or other suitable editors (with their permission, of course!). It's your Guild, after all!
Hello and welcome to our latest newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since October. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Blitz: Our October Copy Editing Blitz focused on July and August 2022 request months; and articles tagged for c/e in December 2021 and January 2022. Seventeen of those who signed up claimed at least one copy-edit, and between them copy-edited forty-six articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: In the November Backlog Elimination Drive, thirty editors signed up, twenty-two of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Both target months—December 2021 and January 2022—were cleared, and February was added to the target months. Sixteen requests were copy-edited and 239 articles were removed from the backlog. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Our seven-day-long December 2022 Copy Editing Blitz begins on 17 December at 00:01 (UTC)*. It will focus on articles tagged for copy-edit in February 2022, and pending requests from September and October. Barnstars awarded will be available here.
Progress report: As of 22:40, 8 December 2022, GOCE copyeditors have processed 357 requests since 1 January, there were seventy-four requests outstanding and the backlog stands at 1,791 articles. We always need skilled copy-editors; please help out if you can.
Election news: Nomination of candidates for the GOCE's Election of Coordinators for the first half of 2023 is open and continues until 23:59 on 15 December. Voting begins at 00:01 on 16 December and closes at 23:59 on 31 December. All editors in good standing (not under ArbCom or community sanctions) are eligible and self-nominations are welcomed. Coordinators serve a six-month term that ends at 23:59 on June 30. If you've thought about helping out at the Guild, please nominate yourself or any editor you consider suitable—with their permission, of course!. It's your Guild and it doesn't coordinate itself.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers and best seasonal wishes from your GOCE coordinators, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Tenryuu, and Zippybonzo.
*All times and dates on this newsletter are UTC. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the March 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December and our Annual Report for 2022. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members, including those who have signed up for our current March Backlog Elimination Drive. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2022 coordinator election, Reidgreg and Tenryuu stepped down as coordinators; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo were returned as coordinators until 1 July. For the second time, no lead coordinator was chosen. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators open on 1 June (UTC).
Drive: 21 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 14 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 170 articles totaling 389,737 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Our February Copy Editing Blitz focused on October and November 2022 requests, and the March and April 2022 backlogs. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine claimed at least one copy-edit; and between them, they copy-edited 39,150 words in 22 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Progress report: As of 12:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 73 requests since 1 January 2023, all but five of them from 2022, and the backlog stands at 1,872 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the June 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since March. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Fancy helping out at the Guild? Nominations for our half-yearly Election of Coordinators are open until 23:59 on 15 June (UTC)*. Starting immediately after, the voting phase will run until 23:59 on 30 June. All Wikipedians in good standing are eligible and self-nominations are welcomed; it's your Guild and it doesn't organize itself!
Blitz: Of the 17 editors who signed up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, nine editors completed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 24 articles totaling 53,393 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 51 editors signed up for the month-long May Backlog Elimination Drive, and 31 copy-edited at least one article. 180 articles were copy-edited. Barnstars awarded are posted here.
Blitz:Sign up here for our week-long June Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 11 to 17 June. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 03:09 on 6 June 2023, GOCE copyeditors have processed 91 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 1,887 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybongo.
*All times and dates in this newsletter are in UTC, and may significantly vary from your local time.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the September 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
David Thomsen: Prolific Wikipedian and Guild member David Thomsen (Dthomsen8) died in November 2022. He was a regular copy editor who took part in many of our Drives and Blitzes. An obituary was published in the mid-July issue of The Signpost. Tributes can be left on David's talk page.
Election news: In our mid-year Election of Coordinators, Dhtwiki was chosen as lead coordinator, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo continue as assistant coordinators, and Baffle gab1978 stepped down from the role. If you're interested in helping out at the GOCE, please consider nominating yourself for our next election in December; it's your WikiProject and it doesn't organize itself!
June Blitz: Of the 17 editors who signed up for our June Copy Editing Blitz, 12 copy-edited at least one article. 70,035 words comprising 26 articles were copy-edited. Barnstars awarded are here.
July Drive: 34 of the 51 editors who took part in our July Backlog Elimination Drive copy-edited at least one article. They edited 276 articles and 683,633 words between them. Barnstars awarded are here.
August Blitz: In our August Copy Editing Blitz, 13 of the 16 editors who signed up worked on at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 79,608 words comprising 57 articles. Barnstars awarded are available here.
September Drive:Sign up here for our month-long September Backlog Elimination Drive, which is now underway. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 14:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have processed 245 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,066.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello, and welcome to the December 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. Don't forget that you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: The Guild needs coordinators! If you'd like to help out, you may nominate yourself or any suitable editor—with their permission—for the Election of Coordinators for the first half of 2024. Nominations will close at 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). Voting begins immediately after the close of nominations and closes at 23:59 on 31 December. All editors in good standing (not under current sanctions) are eligible, and self-nominations are welcome. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term that ends at 23:59 on 30 June.
Drive: Of the 69 editors who signed up for the September Backlog Elimination Drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 661,214 words in 290 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here.
Blitz: Of the 22 editors who signed up for the October Copy Editing Blitz, 13 copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 109,327 words in 52 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here.
Drive: During the November Backlog Elimination Drive, 38 of the 58 editors who signed up copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 458,620 words in 234 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here.
Progress report: As of 20:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 344 requests since 1 January, and the backlog stands at 2,191 articles.
Other news: Our Annual Report for 2023 is planned for release in the new year.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the April 2024 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2023 coordinator election, Zippybonzo stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki and Miniapolis were reelected coordinators, and Wracking was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).
Drive: 46 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 32 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 289 articles totaling 626,729 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: 23 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 18 claimed at least one copy-edit and between them, they copy-edited 100,293 words in 32 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 53 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive, 34 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 300 articles totaling 587,828 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 14 to 20 April. Barnstars will be awarded here.
Progress report: As of 23:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 109 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,480 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the June 2024 newsletter, a quarterly-ish digest of Guild activities since April. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Wanted: new Guild coordinators! If you value and enjoy the GOCE, why not help out behind the scenes? Nominations for our mid-year coordinator election are now open until 23:59 on 15 June (UTC). Self-nominations are welcome. Voting commences at 00:01 on 16 June and continues until 23:50 on 30 June. Results will be announced at the election page.
Blitz: Nine of the fourteen editors who signed up for the April 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 55,853 words comprising twenty articles. Barnstars awarded are available here.
Drive: 58 editors signed up for our May 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive and 33 of those completed at least one copy edit. 251 articles and 475,952 words were copy edited. Barnstars awarded are here.
Progress report: As of 05:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC) , GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 2,779 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed Mox Eden to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as Lead Coordinator, and Miniapolis and Wracking returned as assistant coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.
Blitz: 13 of the 24 editors who signed up for the June 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 169,404 words comprising 41 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 38 of the 59 editors who signed up for the July 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 482,133 words comprising 293 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: 10 of the 15 editors who signed up for the August 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 71,294 words comprising 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive:Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.
Progress report: As of 05:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 233 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,824 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
