This is an archive of past discussions with User:Rcsprinter123. 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.
Incredibly sorry, again! I glanced at it once the other day and then completely forgot. I'm terribly busy of late, sorry if this sets a bad example but as I'm only a volunteer with no obligation it can't be helped. Test is up, then we can have the next lesson. Rcsprinter(rap) @ 20:07, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
As well as everybody (nearly) !voting keep, I found there were multiple good sources and it meets the notability guidelines, in my view. Although in your !vote you said it was a case of BLP1E, I think that even this college basketballer has something which should be included. If you disagree with the decision, open up another AfD. Rcsprinter(articulate) @ 18:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
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.
Finally got a chance to answer the questions. Please check the answers. Also, I am still waiting for feedback on the answers I messed up. (Have been asking since quite a time for those; Didnt get it yet :| )
TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:11, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
On your adoption page I have now marked the copyright test and put up the next lesson. In regards to your long-lingering question about what you didn't do quite right: first of all: don't worry about it.. But, if you insist, here follows a detailed analysis of your messings up.
On Five Pillars Q5, I asked you about reliable sources. And Facebook is absolutely not a reliable source. It will be promotional in every way, and is never acceptable as a reference. So when you answered with an "OK but apart from the controversy part", that wasn't really right. Just an absolute no-no, any social network, or indeed, non-proper or non-self-published website. Have you read our policy on reliable sources?
Rcsprinter123, I have just reversed your unilateral removal of "Template:" from the templates on the T:TDYK page, including the boilerplate up top and the daily headers. Those were there for a very good reason, and you should have inquired on WT:DYK before removing them, starting with you "what's the point of Template?" edit summary on December 8. The point is that this is how people are instructed to enter their newly created nomination templates on the T:TDYK nominations page: with "Template:" as part of the entry.
If you have any questions or disagreements, please take them to the DYK talk page, where the matter can be discussed in detail. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm all for consistency, but it doesn't even make a difference besides lowering the amount of text on the page (a good thing™). It's like the difference between using [[WP:IAR|Ignore all rules]] and [[Wikipedia:IAR|Ignore all rules]]. One is shorter, the other isn't. They both do effectively the same thing. Rcsprinter123 was just being BOLD and shorting the page text. Legoktm (talk) 05:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The point is it's confusing for new DYK contributors if none of the existing entries look like the instructions on the created template page (not T:TDYK) say they're supposed to look. I remember being caught by that back when I started. It's not like the extra "text" is a real length problem editing this page, since most people go to the date they want and just edit from there. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
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.
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low to High , while for quality the scale goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
I've had to reverse your NAC of New York City Subway in popular culture. Please review the criteria for "Speedy Keep" before applying it to discussions again.—Kww(talk) 15:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Sure, there were lots of people saying "keep", but the rules of "speedy keep" are quite explicit in that the nominator must not have advanced an argument for deletion, withdrawn the nomination, the nomination being unquestionably vandalism or disruption, the nominator having been banned, the page being a policy or guideline page, or currently linked from the Main Page. None of those were applicable. I agree that the nominator had a shaky deletion argument (quoting the MOS page about trivia lists instead of WP:NOT's dictate against indiscriminate information), but that's a form problem. You can have unanimous "keep" vote, hundreds of voters long, and not qualify for a "speedy" keep. "Snow keep", perhaps, but it's hard to justify one of those after only a day.—Kww(talk) 21:08, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I think for someone who goes in for such cheap insults like that wouldn't be such a terrible editor. No other person has that put ahead of their other offices, why are you arbitrarily making an exception here? There is no reason. So you might have been around for longer than three weeks, but you obviously haven't got a clue. Think about that before you engage in personal attacks again. Paleohelper (talk), 18:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
As a veteran editor, you should know that moving or editing other people's comments without notice is seen as extremely bad form. Your edit in particular completely changed the meaning of my comment, since its referent ("that line of reasoning") after your move was pointing to another different unrelated comment. My comment is not intended as a "general comment" about the topic, it's a very direct statement about your stated reasons to start the talk. In any case, if you expected the page structure to follow certain conventions, you should state them explicitly instead of going moving other people's comments without first asking. Diego (talk) 23:57, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
