This is an archive of past discussions with User:Figureskatingfan. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Mom & Me & Mom to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,301 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk09:14, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hey Figureskatingfan! Just for laughs, do you mind dropping a barnstar on my talk page for me finishing my GA recruitment? :P WooHoo! • Talk to me!01:05, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Note: if they've reformed/about to do so then the info box photo is no longer current and may require work on its NFUR.
I've had a quick glance at the article and note that Finch/Contraband ref is no longer Australian Rock Database (albeit still linked to that article) but rather the Australian Music Database, which may not be as reliable. The latter site seems similar to Discogs: anyone with an email can contribute.
Thanks for the good wishes; I think that all the info you put from the album notes really helped. I thought that the ref you mention was a little fishy, so I'll go through both the Finch/Contraband and the database, and make sure that everything is reliable. Or at least we need to back up using it. I also wanted to see what reviewers think about the info box image, and I'll go take a look at the NFUR as you suggest. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:46, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Wow indeed. I had no idea you achieved this fantastic milestone. Well done! I just heard the news and came to express my condolences. Scartol • Tok14:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Scar. I'm so grateful that Dr. Angelou influenced me in such significant ways, from working on, writing, and improving her articles here. I'm proud for my part in ensuring that the articles here are worthy of their subject. And I'm profoundly sad today. Of course, if it weren't for you and Wadewitz, who led me through the improvement of I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings to FA-status (one of my first FAs), and for Moni3, who reviewed it and other Angelou articles, it wouldn't have been possible. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:03, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Condolences on the death of Maya Angelou, which I head about on the news a few days back. My knowledge of her comes entirely from reading and reviewing your articles. Fortunately, they are in good hands. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:54, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
A bit late, but with the same sentiment. I fondly remember getting her birthday hook to the Main page on the day. Every time one of "my" article subjects dies, I feel a loss, several, unfortunately, the first was Richard Adeney, my fourth article, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
For spending such a tremendous amount of time and work bringing the suite of Maya Angelou articles to FA. Your hard work and effort meant that during these days after her death, when the pages had very high page views, Wikipedia presented nicely polished articles to the world. Well done! You deserve to be proud of yourself. Victoria (tk) 19:01, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Editor's Barnstar
I know how hard you worked on Maya Angelou's pages and you deserve to be very proud of your excellent articles. What a great tribute to Angelou to have such well written articles to present to our readers at this time! . Gandydancer (talk) 00:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you
I'm taking this space here to thank those of you who expressed their condolences after the death of Maya Angelou this week, and for your kind words and barnstars, especially User:Another Believer, User:Scartol, User:Dr. Blofeld, User:Hawkeye7, User:Victoriaearle, and User:Gandydancer. In many ways, this has been a difficult week, and with all the editors who have made my life difficult, I appreciate your assistance and good thoughts. As I tell Scartol above, I'm honored to have contributed to Dr. Angelou's articles. It was a humbling and frightening experience to look at the view counts the few days after she died. I can't tell you how grateful I was that these articles were "up to snuff", and I'm grateful for the many fellow editors and reviewers who helped them get that way. I'm proud that our community was ready when so much of the world came here for solid, well-researched information about Dr. Angelou, and that we were able to honor her in this way. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
You did a brilliant job and it was an easy decision with clear consensus to ensure that her article was on the main page as soon as possible. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup
Was eyeing over the list to figure out how much I need to catch up this month after the burnout I had in May over that stupid attack on FPs. I'm pretty sure you have more than 90 points: I write the Featured content section of The Signpost, and have seen how awesome you are. So, what awesome FAs are you hiding from us all? =) Adam Cuerden(talk)06:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Ah thanks, such kind words. I've been somewhat lucky this round, with being placed in a relatively low-scoring pool. I actually have a FAC pending [9]; actually, it's languishing like all my FACs tend to do; plus, I have one GAC in the long queue. I'm going to have to get on the ball and start acting strategically, since I see that my 90 points is no longer enough to move forward at this point. I'm a little behind, with Dr. Angelou's death this week and all, plus going out of town early last week. Thanks for the warning about your intentions! ;) Hey, in the spirit of competition, would you mind taking a look at the above-mentioned FAC? I don't review FPs, so I can't promise to help out in that area, but anything else you need, just ask and I'll see what I can do.
It's a bit late to do it tonight, but I'll look it over tomorrow. (Currently have 4 FPCs out, and am working on #5 (Suspect I'll only get four of the five to pass, as one is two similar views of the same person). What's the GAC? Adam Cuerden(talk)23:24, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
I'd be happy to look at the GAC as well if needed, but I'm not so good with the FAC. The only ones that I saw open for you are The_Cockroaches (there is a hidden comment from you from 4 May 2014 that says you would like to withdraw?) and Fanny Bullock Workman (for User:Wadewitz). Am I missing one? Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Per User:Adam Cuerden: Thanks for looking at the FAC, and good luck with your FPCs. Suda lists the two GACs I currently have in the queue. Per User:TLSuda: I'm fairly certain you're looking at The Cockroaches' first review in May 2013, when I did withdraw it. I've resubmitted it this year because I think that many of the issues I couldn't resolve back then have been resolved since it was last at GAC. If you review it, please make sure that you review GAC2, thanks. I'm also not going to submit the Workman article to the Wikicup, since it feels wrong to get the credit that Wadewitz worked on. Suda, is there any reason you won't review the FAC? If it's because you're unfamiliar with the topic, no worries because I doubt I'm gonna get an expert's perspective, anyway. If it's because you're not confident with reviewing FACs, I highly recommend that you try, anyway, and not because I'm desperate for reviews. There was a time when I felt uncomfortable reviewing FACs, but someone asked me so I jumped in and found that it's not as bad as I thought, especially since I already had some successful FACS under my belt and was already familiar with the FAC process. I've found that reviewing articles in any forum here not only helps out my fellow editors, it also makes me a better writer and editor. It can be very fun, too. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Cockroaches you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TLSuda -- TLSuda (talk) 21:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I hadn't seen or heard from you in a few days; just wanted to remind you that this is ready for you to look at. I know you're busy, so take your time. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 23:55, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, User:TLSuda, yes I'm busy, plus my laptop is in the shop this week, so I'm hit and miss with internet access. I'm taking advantage of the week deadline! ;) I anticipate getting to it tomorrow, I hope, so that it can be ready for GA DYK by the time The Cockies perform their reunion concert at the end of the month. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks pal. What crankiness? You were just being thorough, which I appreciate. Wow, this marks a first time for me: this is the first time one of my FACs passed before I got around to addressing comments. Which I'm in the middle of doing. Ah well, I'll continue, because I figure that Ian promoted it with AGF that I'd finish. Yippee! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Oh good. I always worry, when friends ask me to review their stuff, because despite all my best intentions I do have this tendency to turn into for lack of a better term a copyediting Nazi. :) Anyway, I really appreciate your taking the time and consideration to finish addressing my comments; your changes totally would've gotten my firm support. Shoebox2talk14:39, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
No problem, I like Nazi-copyediting. You were just being thorough, which I like because it makes for better articles. I like the FAC process because for every surfacy-unhelpful review, there's a good, solid one that actually makes the article better. Although I hate it when reviewers have you jump through hoops just for the sake of it. I trust that your reviews will be helpful, which is why I asked. There was the one time, though, when an editor resented my thoroughness and told me I obviously knew nothing about copy-editing. I told him that it was unreasonable to expect professional-level reviews from volunteers, quoted my mother at him ("You attract more flies with honey..."), and stopped the review because he was being disrespectful towards me. Then he basically told me I was being an emotional female, and I told him to not ask me to review another of his articles. But anyway, forgive the transgression, and thanks again. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:05, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Main Page appearance: All God's Children Need Traveling Shoes
This is a note to let the main editors of All God's Children Need Traveling Shoes know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 4, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask Bencherlite (talk·contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 4, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
All God's Children Need Traveling Shoes, published in 1986, is the fifth book in African-American writer and poet Maya Angelou's seven-volume autobiography series. Set between 1962 and 1965 and taking its title from a Negro spiritual, the book begins when Angelou is thirty-three years old, and recounts her time in Accra, Ghana. It starts where her previous book, The Heart of a Woman, ends, with the traumatic car accident involving her son Guy, and ends as she returns to America. Angelou (pictured in 2013) upholds the long tradition of African-American autobiography, and at the same time makes a deliberate attempt to challenge the usual structure of the autobiography by critiquing, changing, and expanding the genre. As in her previous books, it consists of a series of anecdotes connected by theme. She depicts her struggle with being the mother of a grown son, and with her place in her new home. Angelou examines many of the same subjects and themes of her previous autobiographies, including motherhood, the parallels and connections between the African and American parts of her history and character, and racism. (Full article...)
You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. Thank you. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
I gladly would. Will set it up tomorrow. =) ) Shall have to try and get a few of her books to scan the covers, maps, etc. Adam Cuerden(talk)23:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Wow, I dunno if it's right to technically work on two FACs at the same time, but I think that it will be okay. Good cause and all. Anyway, whatever you think would help. Maps would be very cool--I keep on using that word! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Yah, I saw. But your sig isn't *exactly* like mine; I don't have the Talk to... ;) I only did it that way because only being slightly technically savvy, I couldn't figure out how to configure it exactly how I wanted, but then I grew to like it anyway. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
SS source
One chapter: Saturday morning censors: television regulation before the V-chip, Heather Hendershot, 1998, Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press - available in U of I library. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014 June newsletter
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's Godot13 (submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, Casliber (submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.
The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk·contribs) The ed17 (talk·contribs) and Miyagawa (talk·contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Adam, it's already had a PR; I think that it's ready for FAC now. I'm not in any hurry, so if you want to wait until you finish the images, that's fine with me. Although it will probably languish for a while, anyway, but if you want to ensure that you're done before it gets reviewed, I wouldn't be opposed to waiting. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:08, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
By the way, on the subject of the Fanny Bullock Workman article - I'd like tot ry to get all of the remaining Wadewitz articles up to FA, and an[other] FP for as many as is possible. What do you think? Adam Cuerden(talk)02:10, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Ha ha, I was wondering about that, but figured you were waiting. I'm happy to assist with this very worthy project. I'll take a look at her userpage and contributions and see what we can improve next. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:07, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Sarah Trimmer seems like an obvious place for FPs - authors now well out of popularity, but who were once very popular, tend to be fairly cheap to acquire copies of, compared to still-iconic books. Checking, about $20 will get me hosts of FPs for Trimmer. Adam Cuerden(talk)05:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Want to learn image restoration? The second Fanny Bullock Workman image should be fairly easy, and I could teach you =) Adam Cuerden(talk)15:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Ha ha, that did not go over my head. I corrected my error in the article; thanks for catching it. For some reason, this article has been getting a lot of attention from its DYK today. Could it be because of its topic, obscure children's television programs? Hmmm... ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
As a mountaineer, I commend you for your outstanding work on this article. I saw that Wadewitz worked on it as well, which brought a tear to my eye. I wish you well. Cullen328Let's discuss it06:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, a few of us (myself, User:Adam Cuerden) are bringing it along. Currently, it's at FAC [11]. It makes me sad, too, and angry at the universe. But it's worth it because we're certain that it's something Wadewitz would've wanted. Thanks for the kind words. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 13:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
As you may know, I write for the Signpost, basically Wikipedia's newsletter. I'd like to do a feature on the semifinalists, would you be willing to provide, say, 250 to 500 words saying: (1.) Why did you join the Wikicup? (2.) What you you hope to get out of it? and (3.) Which of your contributions to the Wikicup are your favourites?
Not quite sure how I'll order them - I'll probably make the ed17 decide, as, you know, Conflict of Interest: I am a semifinalist. I'd imagine point order or alphabetical or the like.
I figured that you would be a good person to ask about this. From the beginning, the citations on List of Sesame Street Muppets, and others like it, are shown as: "Finch, p. 53", "Davis, p. 5", "Morrow, p. 93", etc. What is that supposed to mean? It doesn't say it's a book and there certainly isn't a link for verification. I find it hard to believe that this is an acceptable way citing a source. (??) --Musdan77 (talk) 17:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
User:Musdan77, those are sources taken from the sources (most often, books) listed in the "References" section. It's a very acceptable way to list sources from books or sources with multiple page numbers, and parallels the way sources are handled in scholarly sources. See WP:SFN. I suggest that you read the entire guideline about citing sources. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, just after I posted here, I did scroll down and saw the "References" section. It may be a "very acceptable way" but I don't think it's a very helpful way, if there's no explanation at the top of the "Notes" section. If an experienced editor, like me, doesn't know that, I doubt many novice users would. Anyway, thanks for the reply and the link. --Musdan77 (talk) 23:10, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Featured article candidate proofread help
Hi there,
Someone that I closely work with reviewing film related lists has asked me if could proofread Kangana Ranaut for featured list promotion. I have never reviewed an article for FA promotion, but I'm willing to give it a shot since I too want to learn the dos and dont's of improving article to such status (I hope to do the same for 2010 NBA Finals). What suggestions do you have for FA reviewing since I admire your great work with Sesame Street articles and lists?
Thanks for the kind words, User:Birdienest81, and of course I'd love to help. FAC needs dedicated, hard-working reviewers. It helps to have gone through the experience yourself by submitting one of your articles to FAC, so that you know the process from all sides. Like you, the first FAC I reviewed was because someone asked me to, and although I was nervous, once I mustered up my courage and jumped in, I found that it was fun. I looked at other reviews, to see how other editors did it. Some editors (like me) tend to be picky and comb through the prose and list their feedback, along with suggestions. Making suggestions is very important when you review articles, since you're there to see things the main editors miss because they're too close to see them. Other editors specialize, and look at one aspect of the article: prose, sources, structure, for example. Several people review each article, so you don't have to be thorough. We all bring a unique perspective to the articles we review. I suggest that you find what you're good at and share it with the editors who've bravely submitted their work. And remember that the point is to improve articles, not to have editors jump through hoops just for the sake of it. Hope this helps, and please let me know if I've missed anything.
This place (WP) is all about reciprocity, so would you mind taking a look at an FAC I've submitted? [12] It should be relatively easy to review, since a few other reviews are already there; at this point, it just needs a couple of more supports to pass. Thanks, I appreciate it. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Uh, sorry don't think so. My work schedule, once the semester starts up again, looks like it's gonna be crazy. I'm taking classes to prepare for a PhD program. I'm very involved in Toastmasters, and have family and church commitments. Plus, I'm perfectly happy operating in obscurity here in WP, making the world a better place by working on my pet articles. At least that's my initial reaction, but as always, I'll consider it. Again, thanks for the thought. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Christine! I'm working on the prose review; it should be done by tonight. Also, I just wanted to let you know I made a mistake when linking one of my comments, but I've fixed it at the FAC. ceranthor21:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Remember me?
Hi there. Remember me?
I asked for your help 4 years ago. I've been very busy for the last few years that's why I stopped editing and using my account here, but now I'm back and I just graduated last year.
It's nice to see that you've successfully passed Maya Angelou and your other works to higher level class article. I'm happy for you. I hope we can be friends again and maybe I can ask you for help if you have time since I'm not that familiar with the new editing tools here and I can't remember how I started before. If you can't remember me, you can check my talk page our discussion was still there.
After I looked around, yah, I do remember you. And yah, if you need assistance, just ask. Welcome back! Thanks for the kind words, I appreciate them. Remember to have fun and do your best to make a positive contribution! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:31, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! The answer is that I was unaware of it! I will go and add it now. Actually, one of my newest goals is to expand every article about individual co-productions, as much as it's possible. Currently, Iftah Ya Simsim, the Arab version, is up for FAC [13], and Plaza Sesamo, the Mexican version, is up for GAC. Loads of fun! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Looks like there are quite a few versions, I must say! (That's a lovely template at the bottom of the article). So a new FT after Angelou? Sounds interesting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:39, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, there are 20. I don't know, though, if there's potential for an FT, since there might not be enough information to use as sources. But I've been wrong before! It will certainly be fun finding out. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I think, worse comes to worse, you'll have to find someone who speaks the local language to help write. I don't speak Japanese, so the (brand new) FA Departures would never have passed without Curly Turkey and his language skills. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
So sorry
I am very sorry for not explaining the reasoning behind the edits I made to Blue's Clues - I did have reasons, though. They were that the picture did not fit the area it was placed in, and the second edit (on the spin-off) was because of how the character of Joe did not appear until season 2 of Blue's Room and therefore was not the star of the show. Thanks (sorry for troubling you by not explaining this)! Momsandy (talk) 21:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
GA Cup
Hello everyone! We hope you have all been having a great summer!
As we all know, the recent GAN Backlog Drives have not had any big impact on the backlog. Because of that, me (Dom497), Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor have worked on an idea that could possibly finally put a dent into the massive backlog. Now, I will admit, the idea isn't entirely ours as we have took the general idea of the WikiCup and brought it over to WikiProject Good Articles. But anyways, here's what we have in mind:
For all of you that do not know what the WikiCup is, it is an annual competition between several editors to see who can get the most Good Articles, Featured Article's, Did You Know's, etc. Based of this, we propose to you the GA Cup. This competition will only focus on reviewing Good articles.
For more info on the proposal, click here. As a FYI, the proposal page is not what the final product will look like (if you do go ahead with this idea). It will look very similar to WikiCup's page(s).
The discussion for the proposal will take place here. Please let us know if you are interested, have any concerns, things to consider, etc.
The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:
Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
Casliber (submissions) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
Czar (submissions) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
12george1 (submissions) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
Bloom6132 (submissions), the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.
There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.
There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk·contribs) The ed17 (talk·contribs) and Miyagawa (talk·contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
SMH
This is what you said on Flyer22's talk page responding to my strawberries post:
"<sarcasm> No, you're not being creepy at all.
This is the second time today that I've warned someone for coming close to inappropriate behavior. Ask yourself: would you do this to a male editor? If the answer is no, then yes you're being creepy and need to watch yourself. I haven't looked at your edit history, but I would suspect that this isn't unusual."
What is wrong with you? You are the second person accusing me of something that is 100% nonsense, Flyer22 happens to be the second. My bowl of strawberries thing was a joke because as it said I saw she edits sex related things a lot. I actualy was not being creepy that was the joke. Nothing at all to do with the fact I am dude she's a gal. NOTHING. Yes I would do that to a male. When sending that wikilove no "she's a girl and I am a guy" thoughts were in my head. I need to watch nothing I have not done anything wrong. If you had looked at my edit history perhaps you wouldn't be throwing around acusations. How would you react if I called you a racial slur or something? I'm not like that. Clearly not everyone is as nice here on wikipedia as I thought. I hope you've realised your mistake and are willing to admit it. --DangerousJXD (talk) 22:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
@DangerousJXD:, I'm not going to admit anything, and I'm certainly not going to waste my time by explaining to you why your post on Flyer22's talk page was inappropriate. I have seen your edit history, and I agree with Fly that something isn't right. You say that you're an inexperienced editor, but you know about wikilove? But that's beside the point, so let's talk about your behavior towards her. You asked her a question, which she refused to answer because she thought she already did, but you insisted on her answering you. That, along with your strawberries, is very close to stalking behavior, and I suggested that you cease and desist. And no, I didn't call you sexist; I just pointed out that your strawberries post was inappropriate, despite your expressed intentions. In the meantime, I highly recommend that you leave Fly alone. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I left Wikipedia but I've since returned. Bit late for a response but you told me to leave Fly alone. That was ridiculous. She picked on me in the first place. Wikilove is at the top of every user page, how could you not click on it? And that other thing there, pure crap. Just wanted to say that. You don't have to reply. Just pretend I said that 5 months ago ;). BTW I got over your crap so I am happy :). See ya. -DangerousJXD (talk) 00:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
No no no, that wasn't it at all!
I wasn't trying to harrass Jena at all, it just bothered me that she was attacking a user (seemingly) without reason. Because if she was, this would be against the Wikipedia policies. I'm sure you, Angus and Jena could prove useful in the future. - CharlieBrown25 (talk) 03:53, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
@CharlieBrown25:, no problem. I think that the confusion was that she (and AngusWOOF and I) thought you were saying that she was attacking you. I'm sure that it was just a matter of miscommunication. I appreciate your conciliatory nature. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:32, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject Good articles is holding a new competition, the GA Cup, from October 1, 2014 - March 28, 2015. The Cup will be based on reviewing Good article nominations; for each review, points will be awarded with bonuses for older nominations, longer articles and comprehensive reviews. All participants will start off in one group and the highest scoring participants will go through to the second round. At the moment six rounds are planned, but this may change based on participant numbers.
Some of you may ask: what is the purpose for a competition of this type? Currently, there is a backlog of about 500 unreviewed Good article nominations, almost an all time high. It is our hope that we can decrease the backlog in a fun way, through friendly competition.
Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors! Sign-ups will be open until October 15, 2014 so sign-up now!
If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the four judges.
Let's be honest. You did most of the work on this one. Still, I'm ready to do a lot more of the work on the next one - Let's finish her work. Adam Cuerden(talk)20:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
OK, I have addressed the problem on the talk page and messaged the GA-nominator which is also the main article contributor. I'm sure he/she will respond very quickly. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Plaza Sésamo you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zanimum -- Zanimum (talk) 18:20, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
If so: either User:Spshu misunderstands the application of notability guidelines, or I do. Please have a look at Indie Rights, its talk page and Spshu's talk page and weigh in.
@3family6: I didn't award any points for this review because you basically "quick-passed" it. You gave no feedback or suggestions for improvement, and it's highly recommended that you do that for the GA Cup. As a matter of fact, it's so recommended, that in Round 2, it's been added to the official rules, so the judges are going to be more strict about it. For now, if you go back and include feedback, I'll go back and reward you points. After this Round, that's not something I could do. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:15, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, sorry. I wasn't aware of that. I'll be more diligent to write down more notes in the future. I'll add some feedback on the review I did, as you graciously have allowed me to do so.--¿3family6contribs01:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
The editor replied to the review, and agreed with me about an objection to the article lead and the subsequent change that I made addressing the objection.--¿3family6contribs18:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
When I found that someone had started the recurring sketches of Sesame Street page, I had to add the link under it's production like there is a section for the recurring sketches on The Muppet Show page. I have done some works on there like how recent Letter or Number of the Day handlings are held and Murray Monster doing his rendition for the "Sesame Street News Flash" in Season 45 (which is this current season). As there are some segments missing on that page, we might have to modify it by looking up the remaining segments before the newer segments appear. Did I leave anything out of that? Outside of that, it has come to my attention that the one-shot Anything Muppet characters have started appearing on the List of Sesame Street Muppets page alongside those Anything Muppets that had lesser appearances ever since the Anything Muppets page was deleted. Someone thought that the page in question might be the place for them. I was also wondering if you have seen the latest episodes of Season 45 yet. --Rtkat3 (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't tend to like the more list-y articles, other than the characters lists. Personally, I don't think they belong here in WP. But that's just my opinion, so knock yourself out with them. Although that means that I don't tend to give my opinion about them, so do whatever you like, but don't expect my involvement. Different editors have different opinions about what's important, and mine is just different than yours. I don't think it's my place to push my agenda, so I won't. Personally, I think there should be more work on the Muppet Show Muppets, and eventually I want to, but I don't have neither the time nor the inclination to do so now. I also want to create/develop articles about individual international co-productions, but I'm a little too busy for it at this time.
Re: Season 45: Actually, I've only seen one episode thus far, and that's because unfortunately, my Sesame Street viewing is dependent upon my kids' viewing. They've been recorded on my DVR, and I'm sure that once they're out of school and we have time to watch one-hour shows, I will. Right now, they've rediscovered Blue's Clues, especially since Amazon Prime added some of the more recent seasons. Ask me again at Christmas time. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:52, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
For your international co-production comment, I already added The Furchester Hotel where Ryan Dillon and David Rudman reprise Elmo and Cookie Monster when they are working with the Furchester-Fuzz Family. This would be Louise Gold's recent involvement with Sesame Street as she is currently operating in London. It was also mentioned in the show that Louise Gold's character Funella Furchester is the sister of Elmo's dad Louie. --Rtkat3 (talk) 19:08, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
I know it's been a while, but congratulations on getting the Sesame Street international co-productions article up to featured status! I remember you telling me a couple of years ago that you were planning on getting that one featured. I was wondering if you had time to do some cleanup of the List of human Sesame Street characters article. I'd like to nominate it for a TFL slot, but the nomination won't pass if the maintenance tag stays in place. I don't know where to find the relevant sources, but I figure you might. If you'd be willing to clear up the sourcing concerns, it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks Neelix, glad to see that you're back. You'll see that the characters list is an FL, but other editors got a hold of it and then the tag was added. I'll have some time tomorrow, and I'll see if I can update the refs and bring it back to higher quality. I think it'd be a good idea for it to be TFL. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:44, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
@Neelix: I've finished repairing and cleaning up this list as per your request. I think that it's ready to be nominated for TFL; if the date closest to November 10 is still open, you might want to shoot for it, since it's the 45th anniversary of The Show's premiere. I also think that whatever it was that brought the list's quality down has been dealt with, and its quality won't be endangered again. I expect, though, to be more diligent about its quality regardless. Thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
I greatly appreciate your renewed work on this list. It looks much better without the maintenance tags. Unfortunately, all of TFL slots for the rest of the month have already been scheduled, so commemorating the 45th anniversary won't be a possibility, but I anticipate submitting it as my next media-related list blurb. Alternatively, you are welcome to submit it to TFLS yourself. As a side note, I just discovered the "Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce" article; you're doing some great work on here, Christine! Neelix (talk) 04:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Editor of the Week
Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for strong content contributions and great work in the GA process. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)
I nominate Figureskatingfan for her GA article reviewing, (mentoring me), and contributing greatly to the project. She really deserves Editor of the Week. A great content creator with 56% her almost 25,000 quality edits to article space, she always uses the edit summary (a small but important courtesy to other editors). She helped judge the GA cup that could greatly boost our GA article count. Her work on the Maya Angelou featured topic along with Sesame Street and The Wiggles has been outstanding.
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}
Hello Figureskatingfan: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween! – Have a good one!
Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Interview
Was looking at next week's Signpost drafts, and saw the very good article about you in the Inlander. Keep up the great work! And if you want to do the Erasmus piece, I'd still love to. =) Adam Cuerden(talk)14:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I was pleasantly surprised and happy with how it turned out. Re: Erasmus: I've been a bit busy IRL, so I've had to put off working on Adrienne's articles. I will put it on my list of stuff to work on during my winter break in January, though. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
No, not at all. I've found that I'm enjoying the attention. ;) Which if you knew me, you'd be surprised. AB, I saw the email through the gender gap list about this, but haven't been able to respond. I'd love to work with you guys with outreach at WSU, so expect my movement on this shortly. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:27, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Like The Cascadia group is a gaining a lot of momentum lately. So glad to have your support and interest in assisting with projects as well! ---Another Believer(Talk)22:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Funny story: during the workshop I led in October at WSU, a few participants marveled at how few WP articles there are about major waterways in the Northwest (the focus of their edit-a-thon was water issues), and I said, "Hey! Maybe there's a systemic bias against Eastern Washington and the Pacific Northwest!" There's so much that can be done to focus on this part of the country, so I'm glad to assist. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:48, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Happy Halloween!!!
Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!
'"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple.
If you are talking about things on the List of human Sesame Street characters page like Gina and Savion being friends, Maria becoming the building superintendent for 123 in 2011, Ernestine the Telephone Operator being seen working at the Furry Arms Hotel, and Luis opening a bike shop in Season 45, the only source for those are in the episodes. I once noticed a YouTube clip of Ernestine the Telephone Operator at the Furry Arms Hotel interacting with Natasha. If that's not the case, then what is? Did I also leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. Casliber (submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.
A full list of our prize-winners follows:
Godot13 (submissions) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 181 featured pictures in the final round.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 65 did you knows in the final round.
Casliber (submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for four featured articles in the final round.
ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.
Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk·contribs) The ed17 (talk·contribs) and Miyagawa (talk·contribs) 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
GA Cup issue raised
Hi Figureskatingfan. Wanted to ping you (in an abundance of caution) about a GAN I am reviewing that has become a challenge due to a single contentious editor who insists that the consensus version of the article is wrong and who has begun attacking me directly on the issue. It is the GAN of Stoor worm. (see Talk:Stoor worm/GA1) The nominators are Sagaciousphil and Eric Corbett, both longtime, experienced editors (full disclosure: I have had Eric Corbett do peer review and GA review of some of my articles, and I did a peer review of one of his). A third editor, Kiyoweap, raised issues last August, a few of which were addressed, but most were refuted for various reasons. S/he then became inactive on the article until I began my GA review, at which point, this editor reemerged and began to raise all the same issues, claiming the article was flawed. This editor apparently stalks these mythology articles and caused similar problems with the FAC for Kelpie. I reviewed many of the points s/he raised and while I did have some feedback for the article, I found that the lead editors were correct in declaring this editor's work to be misinterpreting sources, poorly formatted, badly written, and so on. Long story short, while the two lead editors are working in good faith to fix the issues I did raise, this other editor is disruptive, and most of all, claiming the article is not stable when it is s/he alone who is creating the instability with an IDIDNTHEARTHAT attitude. (User:Drmies commented on this as well) Most recently, the attacks have become personally directed at me; in this edit s/he is implying I am doing an inadequate job because I want points in the GA cup. For this reason, I am alerting you to the situation, and if you feel I am in any way doing an inadequate review, please do advise. I have no desire to game the system. Montanabw(talk)03:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
@Montanabw: first off, my sympathies; it's never fun to deal with a contentious editor. Remember the guidelines for GANs: only one editor is needed to pass an article. My interpretation of the guidelines is that as the reviewer, you could've passed it long ago, even with the lack of consensus. GAN doesn't require consensus like FAC does. Of course, those are separate issues from the GA Cup. It's up to the judges whether or not the points count. If Kiyoweap has issues with the judges awarding you points, that's his problem and there's nothing he can do about it. The only time he can do anything about it is if and/or when the article comes to FAC. Speaking as a GA Cup judge, I would award you points for the review, and you'd probably earn most points possible, depending on when it was nominated. Personally, I think your review is exceptional, far and above the typical GA review. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your gracious comments. I will be able to pass the GAN when the lead editors are able to fix the issues I raised without interference; there are a couple things I would like them to tweak. Stay tuned. Also, maybe get some popcorn and watch the show. Drmies is monitoring and addressing Kiyoweap's behavior... Montanabw(talk)01:37, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
In all honesty, I didn't realise you were working on it, and wish you had told me you were. Will review within a day or so, and see if I can grab anything else off JSTOR. =) Adam Cuerden(talk)02:33, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden:, today was the first time that I looked at it. I didn't make huge changes. So I'm telling you now! ;) I didn't think about it not being comprehensive enough; it seems so to me, but go ahead and do more research to make sure. Looking forward to working with you again! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
G'day, I'm not fussed about the points, but this is a bit of a weakness in the system, IMO. The article in question was already of GA standard, and needed no improvement to be listed, if you can find something I'd be very interested in what it is. The editor who wrote it is one of the most accomplished ship article writers on WP. I struggle to find anything to improve on almost all of his GANs. He was a major contributor to the largest FA topic on en WP. The backlog has been reduced (ie the aim of the GA Cup has been progressed), but the review is not scored because the editor who nominated it had written too good an article? Not exactly my fault, is it? I raise this merely for consideration by the volunteers running the GA Cup, am not interested in having the review scored. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 07:59, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
@Peacemaker67: I understand your frustration, but the judges feel very strongly that it's possible to find at least one piece of feedback. There's always room for improvement, even for the most experienced editors. It's true that one of the goals of the GA Cup is to reduce the backlog, and we're proud that our little competition has helped greatly, but another of our goals is to improve articles. Yes, this ship article was probably already eligible for GA, but the rules for the GA Cup are very clear: reviewers must find at least one piece of feedback to give nominators. The reason we made this rule is because it was taken advantage of during Round 1, and we wanted to prevent it from happening again. I tell you what, though: if you go back and find feedback to give the article, and make sure the nominator knows and addresses it, I'll go back and reward you the points--if it's done by the end of Round 2 (Nov. 28). This is something I've done before, so I have no problem with doing it again in this case. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:47, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Christine- just a little thing, but one of my reviews ("Do or Die", number 1) has been missed. Would you mind checking it and adding it to my score? Thanks! J Milburn (talk) 21:29, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The Mary Wollstonecraft Award is awarded to contributors who have helped improve the coverage of women writers and their work on Wikipedia through content contributions, outreach, community changes and related actions. In particular, thank you for your efforts with the WikiProject Women writers start-up; your ideas and contributions are much appreciated. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:06, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: Thanks so much! I haven't felt like I've really done that much to contribute to your project, but I'm proud that I was physically present in D.C. when you came up with the idea. Not that it's been needed, though; the project has really taken off and has experienced great success, which makes me joyful. You have my support, always. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.
We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.
Hello. I have just read your messages about Sesame Street and the comic book resource I used as a citation. I can assure you that you have made no mistake and that the purpose of my message is a special thank you from me to you. To be honest with you, I am still a little inexperienced and getting the hang of Wikipedia policies, so I really appreciate your help when you sent me those links that I might find helpful. In case if do need help, I will let you know and thank you again, Figureskatingfan. Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 18:15, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
@Hitcher vs. Candyman: I'm so glad you didn't think that I wasn't following this guideline: WP:BITE! ;) 'Cause I sincerely wasn't, I promise! I hope you know that your source wasn't the most reliable and that's why I reverted you. I hadn't read about the connection between Mississippi and Henson, but I'm sure that the comic book source isn't the only source to have made it. If you find a more reliable source that also makes the connection, please add it, since it is somewhat interesting. And please, however I can assist you, just let me know. WP policies can be daunting, but there are lots around who are more than willing to help, including me. We need serious editors dedicated to improving Sesame Street and Muppet articles around here. Hope to see you around the project. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:54, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you can assist me with something, with your permission of course. When you have a chance, would you please contact me at my talk page for details in case you are considering?Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello Figureskatingfan, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015.
Happy editing, Rosiestep (talk) 01:46, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Review Second Opinion
Hi,
After a long absence I'm trying to actually get down to some GA Reviews. To that end I've done one. If its convenient, would you mind taking a quick look over it to see if I've made any mistakes. Thanks. Biggs Pliff (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
@Biggs Pliff: I did take a quick look, and it was a fine GA Review. I agree that it should have passed to GA, although it needs work if the nominator wants to take it to FAC. Personally, I mention that in my reviews, since the point is article improvement in general. Also, you mentioned IMDB; remember, IMDB isn't a reliable source in Wikipedia. Other than that, good job. You should really think about competing in the GA Cup next time! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:39, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I don't even know how to thank you. You have did tremendous work reviewing submissions for the GA cup while I was busy. Without you, the GA cup would be a disaster. ΤheQ Editor Talk?21:12, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
@TheQ Editor: don't I know it. ;) Hey, I came up with the idea of the GA Cup; I certainly couldn't let it become a failure and embarrass myself, doncha know. I suppose the lesson learned is to never conduct a competition like this in December. I felt that there were times when I wasn't able to keep up with everything, and fell behind. I still think it's best to make sure we offset the GA Cup with the WikiCup, though, but we can improve on the timing for next time. That being said, I hope that you and User:Dom497 will be able to do more as we move towards the end. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:13, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I have just noticed that the Round 4 pool of the GA Cup has been completed and I am not present in that pool despite being first in the last round! Seems that Mr Woo Hoo is there instead even though he was eliminated in round 3. Just thought I would point out this error, I do hope that this is not permanent! Regards ☯Jaguar☯00:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
@Jaguar: When I read the above, I went, "Sh*t!" Then I went straight away and fixed it. Can't believe that I did that, since I was sincerely impressed by your performance this Round. Congrats, and my apologies. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I got to admit my heart skipped a beat when I looked at the new round on my phone then I immediately jumped to my computer and turned it on, at almost 1 am. That's how nervous I was LOL. Thanks for fixing it! ☯Jaguar☯00:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup
Hi. I joined the WikiCup today, I have a question. Is the score of all rounds added in last to decide the winner? If not, then why it is so? I mean, if someone works hard in round 3 but not in round 4, he is not the winner? Just a question. My opinion is that the winner should be decided on the basis of the whole year's contributions. Also, probably a mistake is there, as Round 3 winners advanced to Round 4, but the Round 4 winners also advanced to Round 4? That needs correction. I am watching your talk page. Faizan20:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
@Faizan: welcome to the Wikicup. I'm sure you'll have fun in this competition and that you'll do a lot of good work for Wikipedia. No, the scores of all rounds are not added to the finals. The point is that contestants work hard throughout the competition. The Wikicup is tournament-style, kind of like the NBA playoffs. All points are cleared at the end of each round, and everyone who moves forward starts the new round with a clean slate. This is how this competition has been set up; the rules are very clear. Your links are to last year's Wikicup, which will have no bearing on this year's competition. Hope I answered your questions, and good luck! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:16, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, questions answered. Regarding the last year's links, I wanted to say that the for Round 4 winners of 2014, in the table, it is written that "Round 4 winners advance to Round 4", probably this needs to be corrected. Rest of it fine. Faizan — Preceding undated comment added 07:42, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 launch newsletter
Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.
Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk·contribs), Miyagawa (talk·contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk·contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
*sigh*
You know, I kind of wish I hadn't found out you were one of the judges. Slashing FP points, with an ill-thought-out "no sets" rule [One FP per page is, by pretty much by definition a no set rule: several highly related images on the same subject is the definition of an FP set; I can't think of any sets that weren't all in one article], and a justification involving simulations of a sort that... I honestly don't think there's even enough background data for. How on earth would you compare the work put in on pictures vs. articles, when even I, with a number of FAs and GAs and many, many FPs don't know.
And the wikidrama is for no purpose. You have already alienated the entire FP community. There might be one or two FPs in the Wikicup, no more. It's whether you want to get people back next year at this point, and - [I am unable to fiinish this discussion calmly]. Adam Cuerden(talk)05:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Donovan Patton you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seattle -- Seattle (talk) 17:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Following you around
While we're on the subject of editors following you around (re: the cups and Boat Race GAs), I was doing some work on Ika Hügel-Marshall and on my search for sources I discovered this book vaguely related to the subject, written by one Christine Meyer. Sounds familiar! Ritchie333(talk)(cont)20:09, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Ha! Nope, not me. I am bilingual, but in English and ASL, not German, although I have German ancestry. Actually, Christine Meyer, being my married name, is quite common. My maiden name is much more rare, though; when I google it, only one person shows up, a lawyer who lives in central Germany. I suspect that she's related to me in some way. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:30, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
If I google my real name I get all sorts of stuff, some of it over 20 years old. Much nicer to do an image search for "Ritchie and Rhonda" (which has me in most of the hits returned). Ritchie333(talk)(cont)20:48, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Christine. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page next month. Does the article need more work before hitting the Main Page? I had to squeeze the summary down to a little over 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank (push to talk) 15:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
I've initiated a discussion at Talk:86th Academy Awards of how the performers table should be formatted because Atomic Meltdown and I were in a dispute resulting in warnings about being blocked. I think there should be consensus, and since you are an expert on film articles, I would like your feedback, please.
Hello Figureskatingfan, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve,
Happy editing, Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 22:24, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
For your involvement as a judge for the 2014–15 GA Cup. It was a fun and rewarding experience for us all. You guys deserve a barnstar too :) — MusikAnimaltalk22:55, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 March newsletter
One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
Rodw (submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
And last but not least, Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark(pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
If you are talking about the puppeteer info that was re-added to the List of Sesame Street Muppets page, they were identified by the viewers who heard their voices and placed the info on IMDb, VoiceChasers, Behind the Voice Actors, and the Muppet Wiki. Some of those puppeteer roles have included in what year and episode each one did like Captain Breakfast and Jamie Fox to name an example and Caroll Spinney's rendition of Guy Smiley in Episode 10. The brown Anything Muppet in the "I Love My Hair" song has since been called Segi including a recent episode that she had a main part in. Besides the Gikow references, the only other references would be if some of those characters had pages on the official Sesame Street website. Did I leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
@Rtkat3: that's not my point. All the additions you made cannot be supported by reliable sources. The webpages you name are not reliable sources, mostly because they're user-generated and cannot be verified. Gikow and Sesame Street.org are reliable because they're published and can be verified. There is no reliable source that I could find verifying that the "I Love My Hair" Muppet is named Segi, but I thought that she was important enough to include, which is why I called her "I Love My Hair Muppet" in the list. I recommend that you read WP:RS, which clearly explains the difference between a reliable source and an unreliable one. To be frank, I'm a little surprised that you've asked this question, since you've been around for a while and I'd think you'd understand this key WP policy. This is an issue that's come up with you before, especially with Sesame Street lists. I've been meticulously going through this list (interrupted by RL concerns), updating and making sure the content reflects the sources, with the goal of submitting it to FLC, which is a vigorous process. The sources you name would not pass muster at FLC. I would ask that you keep all of this in mind as you contribute to this list. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:00, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
GA Cup
Funny enough, we still have to give barnstars to the participants who were eliminated in Round 2...I don't know which one to give! Any ideas?--Dom497 (talk) 00:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
![[10]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_Bullock_Workman#mediaviewer/File:FannyBullockWorkmanVotesWomen.jpg){kind=link}
