User talk:Iazyges/Archives/2023/May
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
WikiCup 2023 May newsletter
The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:
Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.
Other notable performances were put in by 
Sammi Brie, 
Thebiguglyalien, 
MyCatIsAChonk, 
PCN02WPS, and 
AirshipJungleman29.
So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
- Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
Arbitration
- The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.
Miscellaneous
- The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.
The Bugle: Issue 205, May 2023
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations from the Military History Project
.png)
|
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
| On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Oak Leaves for Christopher Lekapenos, Diadumenian, and Tiberius III. Hog Farm (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC) |
Question about GA reviews
If I believe that a GA review was wrong in parts – some portions were well taken – how should I proceed? Ifly6 (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Ifly6: The WT:GAN talk page may be the best avenue for it, although that is usually used for unambiguously bad reviews, rather than matters of disagreement in a good-faith and good-effort review. Discussing the matter in user talk space may be the most prudent move. For the CLOP bits, it seems like some may fall under "there are only so many ways to say this", but rephrasing would be good for most; it definitely happens, unfortunately, and reviews are a good way to catch such things. As a matter of course, although per rules the copyright policies governing Wikipedia apply to talk pages, generally speaking posting a sentence/paragraph for the explicit purpose of verifying a claim, especially deep within the labyrinths of Wikipedia, has gone uncontested, for reasons akin to WP:IAR. Other methods include uploading a snippet to Imgur, and linking it, or use of email. I'll need to take a closer look at the TSI issues raised, but I would mention that the raised issue of equivocating plebeians with "people" has some merit, IMO. While in modern times, plebian does equate nearly directly to the 99% (or perhaps 90%), it was much more exact in the time. A cause for concern: at some points in Roman Italian history, more than 30% of the population were slaves, and although definitely people, they were explicitly not plebeians. I would consider that difference material, personally. I'll take a closer look at everything and should have the time soon to take up a review myself if you wish. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sure. I also don't want to give the impression that I thought it was entirely wrong: there were in fact a number of areas where the article (likely me) got lazy and wrote too closely. Inasmuch as someone else also agrees that
people writ large
should be changed, I'll do so. Ifly6 (talk) 00:34, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- Sure. I also don't want to give the impression that I thought it was entirely wrong: there were in fact a number of areas where the article (likely me) got lazy and wrote too closely. Inasmuch as someone else also agrees that
The Bugle: Issue 205, May 2023
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:05, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Hey Iazyges. I hope you are doing well and not letting the pressures of school get to you! Regarding Christopher Lekapenos, when were you planning on bringing it to FA? Cheers, Unlimitedlead (talk) 22:14, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead: Soon, I think; I just need to take another run through it to ensure everything looks good. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:24, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 56
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023
- New partner:
- Perlego
- Library access tips and tricks
- Spotlight: EveryBookItsReader
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
The only Byzantine award worth having
|
Panhypersebastos award |
| For excellent and valuable contributions to Byzantine articles, you are hereby "Honoured Above All". You may now wear yellow shoes! Gog the Mild (talk) 17:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC) |
May thanks
 | |
| my story today |
|---|
I agree, and thank you for improving articles in May. - I had a good story on coronation day: the Te Deum we sang that day. And the following day we sang it for the composer ;)
I nominated Soňa Červená for GA just to give her a bit more exposure, and I took some pics of bright scenery - click on songs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:19, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Pentecost was full of music, and my story today is that 300 years ago today, Bach became Thomaskantor, with BWV 75, writing music history. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)