User talk:Tomica/Archive 47

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tomica. 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.

Archive 40

←

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

Archive 48

Archive 49

Archive 50

WikiCup 2014 August newsletter

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:

1. 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 Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
8. 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.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. Matty.007 (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), WikiRedactor (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), Yellow Evan (submissions), Prism (submissions) and Cloudz679 (submissions) have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

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)

You're back!

I noticed you weren't around much; glad you're back! There's Rihanna's song information pages that IP did, it seems like MariaJaydHicky, with bare URLs or unreliable sources. Can you figure it out? 183.171.162.189 (talk) 09:26, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Unapologetic - Rihanna.png

A tag has been placed on File:Unapologetic - Rihanna.png, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

newly upoaded revision is full-resolution

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. INeverCry 22:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 September newsletter

In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer Godot13 (submissions) has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion Cwmhiraeth (submissions) is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. Casliber (submissions), who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.

Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. 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) 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Christmas could come early for us

Hey there, I know we haven't always seen eye to eye but I thought as one Rihanna fan to another; check this out Lost Files might cheer you up Rihanna-RiRi-fan (talk) 05:18, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

If the tracklisting is to go by; the three tracks I want to hear are "Barz" with Nicki Minaj; I would idealy like them to be a remisince of Raining Men and Fly but I do think no doubt it will get compared like fuck to those two songs, "Hall of Flames" and "Lost Files" I would love for Rihanna to have gone back to the days of Music of the Sun and made the album like that what would you like to hear from it? Rihanna-RiRi-fan (talk) 09:45, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Tomica:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – IPadPerson (talk) 16:00, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

• @IPadPerson: Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. Have a Happy one too. ^_^ — Tomíca^(T2ME) 16:11, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:RR screenshot.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RR screenshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.--Lpdte77 (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014: The results

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.
• Czar (submissions) wins the prize for fourth place
• Sturmvogel 66 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• 12george1 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• ChrisGualtieri (submissions) wins the GA prize for 27 good articles in round 2 and the review prize for 28 good article reviews in round 1.
• Caponer (submissions) wins the FL prize for three featured lists in round 2.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize his work on featured portals.
• Figureskatingfan (submissions) wins the topic prize for a nine-article featured topic in round 3.
• 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)

Half of Me AFD

Check out my comment!  — ₳aron 16:58, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I am so pissed at the moment. If the articles get deleted I am seriously retiring Wikipedia, as there is no point in staying here while half of your work goes away in the water. I wrote another comment under yours, I hope there are still some appreciating users who will help save the articles. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 17:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Me too. Just left another message. This really will be the final straw if they get deleted.  — ₳aron 17:32, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

(←) Tomica and Aaron, I apologize that you took the nomination of the Rihanna articles personally. I would like to keep the personal discussion away from the AfD and we can talk about it here if you'd like.

What happened began, as you two noticed, at the Tik Tik Boom merger discussion, when an editor made a WAX-y argument asking why Rihanna album track articles get to have articles while I proposed the Spears song for merging. After taking a look at Rihanna-related song articles, I noticed she had many, many articles for non-singles, many of which did not have independent coverage but rather were based almost completely on album reviews, which WP:NSONGS suggests against. I then launched the mass AfD, and to maintain as much focus as possible (since 20 articles were already being nominated for deletion), I stuck to Rihanna articles. I did consider adding articles for non-notable songs by Spears and Lady Gaga, and while I may bring those to AfD at a later date, you may feel free to do so if you feel that they are not worthy for articles on Wiki. Just make sure of your motives for doing so - AfD is ultimately for improving the encyclopedia, not revenge-warring on other singers' WikiProjects.

Regardless of the outcome, I hope that neither of you decide to retire from the project. Both of your contributions to music-related articles, especially Rihanna ones, is very impressive. Please don't think of this as an attack on the work that you and others have done. Think of it instead as an opportunity for the Rihanna WikiProject to have less quantity and ultimately more focus. –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I find (there are exclusions!) AfD's of ruining the user's work on the encyclopedia. Calvin and I have spent a lot of time, trying to search for sources, writing the articles just for to be deleted? And please don't tell me about quality, cause I strongly believe that 90% of those articles are written in a quality prose and are well organized despite that some of them don't have much information. Putting all of that information in the parent album article would make the album article 150kb+. Honestly, "Tik Tik Boom" looks like a shit compared for example to "Fool in Love" or "Watch n' Learn". And yeah, if the articles are deleted I am gonna just gonna try bring Justin Timberlake discography to a FLC status, and then permanently retire. Wikipedia just became a hell of a place. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 18:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

It's not a matter of the quality of the articles. Yes, the articles are well-written, but I don't find the subject matter notable enough for an encyclopedia, hence the AfD. The album articles already seem to include most essential information about the songs. –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, having your personal opinion is one thing. Ruin users work on 20+ articles is other thing. I doubt you would feel nice if I nominate half of the work you've been through on Wikipedia. It's just totally discouraging, not to tell how much already discouraged I am... — Tomíca^(T2ME) 18:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure it is discouraging, and I'm sorry that you are discouraged. However, Wikipedia has guidelines on notability and what subjects are appropriate for inclusion on the project, and that is of more relevance than individual editors' personal feelings. –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:48, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

As I mentioned in the AfD, please refer to WP:EFFORT: "It is unfortunate that editors put effort into writing or maintaining articles that do not meet Wikipedia policy or guidelines. Many editors have seen articles that they invested time and energy into get deleted, and there is no doubt that this can be discouraging. However, the fact of the effort put into an article does not excuse the article from the requirements of policy and guidelines." –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:49, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Guidelines which were not there at the time those articles were created. One user (I don't know who!) added those new STUPID guidelines that does not make any sense to me nor Calvin obviously, and now we have to respect them? I don't think so, matter of fact I am about to put that stupid rule on vote, because it doesn't make any good for the song articles. And tbh, it's just not me or Calvin, we gonna discourage so many other users if their song articles get deleted. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 18:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

It's too late to try and resolve any of your issues here. You've nominated an extortionate amount of Good Articles which passed their good article nominations for deletion. You've made your bed with it, so you've got to lie in it. You should have tried to resolve any issues you may have had by talking on ours and others talk pages in the first place, instead you took the delete-happy route. I think I speak for myself and for Tomica by saying that we would have appreciated talking it out first instead of being completely humiliated and rubbed up the wrong way by proposing mass deletion of articles that we worked so hard on to write and research. I for one spent days and days on some of those articles, and is totally discouraging. What incentive would there be for me to continue being an active editor on here if half of the articles I have worked on get deleted because one person feels they don't meet criteria? There are several factors to the guidelines, and these articles meet most points. No music article needs to meet every point on the guideline, only one of them. Those guidelines need to be rewritten because they are causing mass conflict between editors now and it's creating tension amongst us, and Wikipedia is meant to be about working together to improve the quality, not working against each other to dramatically reduce the amount of information.  — ₳aron 19:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Maroon 5’s all wikipages

Can you keep an eye on Maroon 5’s wikipages (albums, singles, songs etc.) if who may add unsourced genres. 115.164.186.10 (talk) 09:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I know about you, you're feeling 22!

Yaiks! Thank you buddy. Such a good surprise, always good to work with you. Cheers! — Tomíca^(T2ME) 17:17, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

) 17:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Calvin! Hope Rihanna articles be okay. Lol — Tomíca^(T2ME) 17:54, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Regarding NSONGS and AFD of Rihanna articles, please see here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(music)#WP:NSONG_needs_re-evaluating_and_re-wording  — ₳aron 10:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tomica. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Million Miles Away (Rihanna song).
Message added 10:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You may wish to comment here.  — ₳aron 10:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Tomica. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 09:51, 18 November 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Did you get it?  — ₳aron 09:51, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Last revertions on articles S.O.S. (Rihanna song) & Umbrella (Rihanna song)

1. Please explain me WHY you reverted my changes on pages: “S.O.S. (Rihanna song)” & “Umbrella (Rihanna song)” ???
2. Why you think that my screenshots in “Music videos” section in “S.O.S. (Rihanna song)” article is inappropriate (fails policy or something)? Υμβρελλα (talk) 11:55, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• Because the material you add in Umbrella are just links it's not prose, and that's not how this encyclopedia works. And we don't need random screenshots for every video section, they have a policy to pass so, the screenshots you add are needless. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 12:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• Umbrella (Rihanna song) :
  • Links in “Credits” section: It's useful links to authors & companies.
  • Section “Rihanna Interviews”: In this section Rihanna talks about meaning of the song. It's NOT needless!!! It's useful information.
  • Awards table in “Music video” section: I added this table cuz' this video have 4 wins from 14 nominations. It's one of the best videos of all time.
• S.O.S. (Rihanna song)
  • Screenshots: With this pics section get more understable.
    For example: Rose Colored Glasses (Kelly Rowland song)#Music video or Live Your Life (T.I. song)#Music video. These “Music video” sections have screenshots (thumbnails) too. You think these screenshots is needless too or not? What difference is???
  • My sentence about editor (Nabil Mechi): Why you remove it?… Υμβρελλα (talk) 12:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
• STOP REVERTING MY CHANGES!!! You better response me. Υμβρελλα (talk) 12:48, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• What do you want me to respond you? The music videos are copyrighted work, and screenshots should be only used if there is something important in the text that can also show with a visual. Not all the articles are permitted to have screenshot of their video. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 12:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• How about other items that I wrote above? Υμβρελλα (talk) 12:56, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
• … I asked following: You saw my edit on Umbrella (Rihanna song) article. Why you reverted it??? My changes:
  • Links in “Credits” section: It's useful links to authors & companies.
  • Section “Rihanna Interviews”: In this section Rihanna talks about meaning of the song. It's NOT needless!!! It's useful information.
  • Photo behind the scenes of the music video.
  • Awards table in “Music video” section: I added this table cuz' this video have 4 wins from 14 nominations. It's one of the best videos of all time. Υμβρελλα (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2014 (UTC)