User talk:Gatoclass/Archive 26 (2019)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup![edit]

Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019[edit]


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

a time for thanks and praise

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/White wagtail[edit]

Gatoclass, if the sourcing issue for the table has been settled to your satisfaction, can you please restore the approval tick so this can indeed run now that it's 2019? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:43, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Loschbour man[edit]

Gatoclass, I was hoping you could return to this nomination that you pulled and help get it moving again after the hook suggestion (which seems to have come from the ERRORS discussion). Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:38, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Charles Morgan (businessman)/GA1 redux[edit]

Gatoclass, it's been about two months since I posted above on this GAN, and the review is now over seven months old. Would you like me to find a new reviewer? You've been more active at DYK of late, so perhaps you could finish this review, but if not, it's probably time to find someone else. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is currently the oldest open review. Could you please finish it up. AIRcorn (talk) 21:57, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Aircorn, as you can see from the wikibreak notice at the top of this page, Gatoclass is currently moving house, and is unlikely to have internet until late this month or early April. Perhaps another reviewer needs to be found to finish this up. It has been over three months since I first posted here about it. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:54, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pulled hook[edit]

I understand why you didn't reopen it right away. Thanks for the catch too and I was able to verify how old he was during the end of the filming (100 years old). SL93 (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most commonly[edit]

Hi, why did you revert my change? I explained why "most commonly" is inaccurate in the edit summary and also at WP:TRM. The sentence could probably be reworded to make it clear that the most common number of fathers is three, but that is not the same thing as saying this scenario is the most common. Your change has made the article say something that isn't verified and you need to revert it or reword the sentence. Thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2019 March newsletter[edit]

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

  • United States L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
  • Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
  • Denmark MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
  • United States Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
  • Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
  • Ohio Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

April Fools Day sets[edit]

Hi, I'm willing to help build prep sets for April Fools Day, but some of the hooks seem more straightforward than deceptive to me. In particular, the mud pie hook seems really obvious, and pairing it with an image gives it away entirely. The card game hook also seems pretty straightforward. Is it okay if I go ahead and promote the FBI hook to an image slot? I love the caption! Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 11:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Yoninah :)
I agree that the mud pie hook isn't very April fools-ish, but another user gave it a pretty strong endorsement and I decided it was a battle not worth fighting (given that I have my hands full trying to exert a degree of quality control over a bunch of other hooks).
As to which hooks you choose to run in the lead, that's not an issue I want to buy into given the degree of involvement I've already had with the nominations - so that's entirely in your hands from my POV.
My one comment would be that you shouldn't start building the sets too soon as there is still a substantial bunch of hooks being negotiated. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 12:09, 27 March 2019 (UTC).[reply]
OK, thanks. It can wait another day or two. Yoninah (talk) 13:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. This is the first year I've assembled AFD sets, and I can't say I'm so impressed. It's too bad you can't find more good material in the regular nominations pages. I've done what I could so far, awaiting some questions and final ticks. Yoninah (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yoninah, which ones do you think are needing "final ticks"? I thought they were all verified except the Patsy Rodgers one. Or were you just referring to that one? Gatoclass (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mud pie is lacking citations. Boston Manor Tube Station has been rejected by 2 editors (I would be the 3rd). Army Printing and Stationery Service does not have a final hook. Yoninah (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay Yoninah. Mud pie is not much of a hook anyway, so if the citations are not provided, I would just leave that one out. Boston Manor has been rejected, so you can forget about that one. ALT2 is the selected hook for the Army Printing and Stationery Service hook. I think I verified that one myself the other day, but if you'd like me to formally do it, I can probably do that now. Gatoclass (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yoninah, I have formally verified ALT2 for the Stationery Service nomination. We really need to get moving on these sets now because there's only 10 hours to go. I'll be logging off shortly so won't be able to provide any additional assistance. Gatoclass (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Charles Morgan (businessman)/GA1 once again[edit]

Gatoclass, you opened this review last June 19. That's way too long ago. I can understand that life throws up problems and it seems like you should be able to get back to this soon, but the fact remains that you haven't in over nine months. There's usually something (or several things) at DYK, and so on.

I'd like your agreement that if you haven't completed the next round of the review by a date certain, within the next week or two, I can find a replacement reviewer who will take over and finish the review. There are very good reviewers who will usually agree to do so, especially when the nomination has been waiting so long. (This review has been open over 100 days longer than the next oldest open review.)

Thank you for your consideration. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BlueMoonset, I am SO sorry about the ridiculously long delay in getting back to this nomination, unfortunately it's been a perfect storm of distractions or difficulties since returning to Wikipedia in mid-November, in particular the enforced house move which turned into a two-month-long nightmare as I haven't been in the rental market for many years and I totally underestimated the time it would take to find a new residence amongst other things (like the fact that my car broke down for two weeks just at the wrong time). I finally moved in to the new place on 5 March, but my net connection wasn't restored until late last week (I did do a little reviewing at DYKAFD via mobile over the last couple of weeks, but that device is completely impractical for serious mainspace editing). Even so, I would have been ready to return to the GAN by now, but unfortunately I suffered a debilitating back injury a couple of days after moving in to the new place from which I still haven't recovered, which has prevented me unpacking my library including the relevant Morgan references, as the cardboard boxes my books are packed in are far too heavy for me to move at the moment because of the injury. On top of that, I came down with an ear infection three weeks ago that still hasn't totally cleared up, which has also reduced my capacity for getting things done.
When I began writing this response, I was intending to ask for more time to complete the review, but on reflection, as I still can't be sure how long it's going to be before I can unpack my library, I feel I still can't give you a definite date for completion. Reluctantly then, I think it's time I relinquished this job to somebody else - especially since you've just assured me that you are confident you can find somebody else to finish it quickly (my concern that the nominator might have had to wait more months just for somebody else to start a new review has been a major reason why I clung to it so long). And quite frankly, the changes I want to make to the article might compromise my ability to act as an independent reviewer anyway, so it might be better if somebody else completes it - after all, there is no reason why I can't make these changes later when I have more time to do so. So I'm handing responsibility for this back to you. If you haven't managed to find somebody to complete the review in a few weeks, I can probably return to it, but unfortunately I am just not in a position to be able to do so at the moment. My sincere apologies to both you and the nominator once again, and thank you for your patience and courtesy in dealing with this. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 13:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gatoclass, I'm so sorry you've been injured and ill, even aside from the house-hunting and moving you've had to go through. Thank you for letting me know; I've contacted one potential reviewer, and I hope they'll be able to take this one on soon. Thanks also for your quality control at the DYK AFD pages; I wish there had been better nominations to work with this year. If it's okay, I may ask you to weigh in on a DYK nomination; it's something that needs an old DYK hand with potential BLP hook issues. (I'm not particularly good with knowing where the line is; back when I was building prep sets on a regular basis, I promoted hooks a couple of times that were later pulled for BLP reasons.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sure BlueMoonset, you can point me to it, though I can't guarantee I'll be able to assist, but I am willing to take a look at it. Gatoclass (talk) 15:19, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gatoclass, thanks. It's one of The C of E's: Template:Did you know nominations/Peterborough recall petition, 2019. The question seems to be whether there are BLP concerns in the Jesus comparison in the context of the hook (or in the hook in general—however, she was convicted, she did serve four weeks in jail, and her appeal against the conviction was rejected, and she refused to resign, hence the recall petition). BlueMoonset (talk) 13:42, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've just heard back from Mike Christie, who has agreed to take over the Morgan review. He's very busy at the moment, but can start in two or three weeks, which I said would be fine. With any luck, the review and any resulting fixes will be done before the end of the month. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day![edit]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost: 30 April 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2019 May newsletter[edit]

The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

  • Scotland Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
  • Wales Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
  • Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
  • Kingdom of Prussia Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

Other notable performances were put in by Chicago Barkeep49 with six GAs, United States Ceranthor, England Lee Vilenski, and Saskatchewan Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and Denmark MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular[edit]

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 May 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:11, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

McGeachy hook[edit]

My bad; I didn't intend to imply you were bringing up issues to be obstructionist! Of course you wouldn't have brought it up if you didn't think there was a problem. --valereee (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No offence taken Valereee, I can assure you. Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 20:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2019 Signpost is out![edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2019 July newsletter[edit]

The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

  • Norfolk Island Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
  • South Carolina Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
  • Cascadia (independence movement) SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
  • United States Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics

Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Prep promotions to queue[edit]

Hi, if you could promote Prep 4 and even Prep 5 to the queue, we would be able to fill more prep sets. Yoninah (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Yoninah, but I'll have to do it without reviewing them for now as I don't feel up to it at the moment. Gatoclass (talk) 01:04, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tomorrow's fine too. I just notice that the preps are being moved to the queue a few hours before they go to the main page, one at a time. I'm signing off now anyway. Yoninah (talk) 01:06, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Yoninah, I only load them one at a time because I can only review the sets one at a time - it normally takes about an hour to review a set - sometimes less, but sometimes a lot longer if the set has issues, as can be seen with the latest one. Other admins just speed load a bunch of them without checking them, I don't do that. But I've loaded a couple of extra sets now, I will have to find time to verify them later. Gatoclass (talk) 01:14, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Can't remember if you've banned from here or not, and if so, feel free of course to remove it, but just wanted to let you know quickly that I appreciated your positive and good faith input at the doomed ARCA. It's given me food for thought on how to conduct the required reviews under the current restrictions as there's clearly an obvious appetite for me to do so. Ironically no-one was able to provide any evidence at any point that any of my reviews were in any way problematic. But it seems that evidence isn't important when the case is about me. So I'll crack on with the alt-ERRORS and see how we go. But once agin, cheers for your input. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 10:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Yeager[edit]

Hello, Gatoclass! Thank you, I guess, for adding to the lead a second reference supporting the DYK hook. However, I was puzzled by your edit summary "add source to support dyk hook - I should NOT have to do this, it's the nominator's job". The hook statement in the lead already was, and is, supported by a Reliable Source. Not to mention the three sources supporting it in the text. Was this some kind of misunderstanding, or is there some issue with the first reference? -- MelanieN (talk) 14:55, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well possibly I missed something Melanie, but all the sources I looked at said she is about to be appointed commander, not that she actually had been appointed. If you don't have a source saying the appointment has actually taken place, then the hook which states that it has taken place is erroneous. Gatoclass (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean; that is true of the original source at the hook in the lead section. There actually are two sources already in the article - sources 2 (LATimes) and 3 (CNN) - saying she has actually taken command. Both are cited in the lead section, but you are right that neither of them was cited for the hook sentence in the lead section. The CNN source is cited for the “first woman” hook sentence in the text. Technically material in the lead does not need a citation, but when it is the hook for a DYK it should be cited. So, thank you; this improves the article. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:23, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 July 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:RudolfRocker.jpg[edit]

Notice

The file File:RudolfRocker.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Hard Worker Barnstar[edit]

The Hard Worker Barnstar
It's been five years (minus two days) since I awarded you the Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence, and you're long overdue to receive another barnstar from me. You first began doing administrative DYK work over eleven years ago, and, amazingly, you're still at it. Your long-term commitment to the project is most admirable. I am pleased to award this special barnstar to you in recognition of all of your hard work for the betterment of DYK! Your contributions are very valuable and are much appreciated! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mandarax! Very much appreciated :) Gatoclass (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really glad to see you back! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE: DYK Nomination: DYK Nomination for Henry Lewis (musician)[edit]

Ciao Gatoclass - Just a quick note to thank you for your editorial initiatives on the "Did You Know" column and in the development of articles about noted Australian musicians and composers: Roy Agnew and Raymond Hanson (composer) - Fascinating reading. Bravo!! Perhaps when you have extra time you might take a moment to review the "Did You Know" nomination for Henry Lewis (musician) -- as shown here: Template talk:Did you know on August 25, 2019, which was recently expanded. Lewis was a noted classically trained instrumentalist and symphonic/operatic conductor who achieved widespread international acclaim as the first African-American to surmount racial barriers to lead a major orchestral ensemble in the United States during the turbulent 1960's In addition, he is credited with serving as one of several musical directors of the U. S. Army's only symphonic ensemble - the Seventh Army Symphony Orchestra whose sole mission was to wage peace (not war) in support of America's cultural diplomacy initiatives amidst the ruins of Europe following the conclusion of World War II. A novel idea to say the least, which ultimately attracted the attention of President Eisenhower, who awarded the founder of the Orchestra Samuel Adler (composer) with a special citation. I'm, certain that your editorial expertise and or comments would be welcome during the review process and look forward to reading additional articles related to music from you in the future. Many thanks in advance for your thoughtful and kind assistance. With best regards 2620:65:8000:A203:9D42:9E75:6930:2B88 (talk) 15:53, 1 September 2019 (UTC)GCU[reply]

WikiCup 2019 September newsletter[edit]

The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:06, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case commencing[edit]

In August 2019, the Arbitration Committee resolved to open the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case as a suspended case due to workload considerations. The Committee is now un-suspending and commencing the case.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pianist-composer[edit]

Re: Schumann's piano concerto. I think it makes a difference when a composer of a piano concerto is also a pianist. Brahms wrote a violin concerto, but had to ask his friend about technical matters, for example. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda, anybody with the slightest interest in classical music knows Chopin was primarily a piano composer. Adding that to the article just insults the intelligence of the reader. Apart from which, stating that he was a "pianist" is meaningless anyway, because the vast majority of classical composers are or were pianists. Gatoclass (talk) 09:06, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You convince me, but did you have to say "insults the intelligence" when it was only due to my inability to say in English what I meant to say? No insult intended, actually ever. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:17, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Gerda, and yes, perhaps I could have chosen a better phrase, but nothing else came to mind as an alternative and I wanted to be sure I got the point across. It's just a stock English-language cliche anyway, no offense intended. Gatoclass (talk) 10:19, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking the time to explain the cliche, - I wasn't aware. I remember when I almost went to my first dress rehearsal in concert dress ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:27, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem :) Gatoclass (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 4: workshop extended[edit]

The workshop phase of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case will be extended to November 1, 2019. All interested editors are invited to submit comments and workshop proposals regarding and arising from the clarity and effectiveness of current remedies in the ARBPIA area. To unsubscribe from future case updates, please remove your name from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thanks for your help with Ellie Morrison! --evrik (talk) 18:57, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you evrik :) Gatoclass (talk) 08:57, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dyk[edit]

That's a good idea to put a note on the set when it's not yet fully verified! I'm wondering if that's something I could do...my only worry is that I do something that screws something up when I try to undo it. --valereee (talk) 14:13, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course you can do it Valereee! Just be sure to deactivate the bot while the message is extant so that it doesn't get posted to the main page along with the set. Gatoclass (talk) 13:29, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:11, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2019 November newsletter[edit]

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly Adam Cuerden (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:

  1. Better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly Adam Cuerden (submissions) with 964 points
  2. England Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 899 points
  3. Norfolk Island Casliber (submissions) with 817 points
  4. Wales Kosack (submissions) with 691 points
  5. Washington (state) SounderBruce (submissions) with 388 points
  6. Antarctica Enwebb (submissions) with 146 points
  7. United States Usernameunique (submissions) with 145 points
  8. Indonesia HaEr48 (submissions) with 74 points

All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2020 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Márta Kurtág[edit]

Thank you for thinking about Márta Kurtág (failed ITN, but now DYK)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:54, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that one worked out quite well Gerda! Dare I say that I think the article will get more than the usual number of hits for a classical music hook - should do anyhow :) Gatoclass (talk) 16:54, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I still think that Recent deaths would have been even better for her. See if Márta Kurtág had been an American man, she would have appeared, but she is an Hungarian woman. Thinking about how to change the bias for the next one. - Did you see the video? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 1[edit]

Hi, I think you cut off the quirky part from this hook. I suggest writing it this way:

... that Mill Creek, Washington, was not named after a mill or a creek? Yoninah (talk) 18:09, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 4 image[edit]

Hi, thanks for changing the image; it's much nicer. Please change (pictured) to (illustrated). Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 15:20, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Yoninah, but what's wrong with "pictured"? Gatoclass (talk) 15:25, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We usually say that for a photograph. A sketch or drawing is "illustrated". Yoninah (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know when this started creeping in Yoninah but I think it's misguided. A picture is a picture, it doesn't matter whether it's a photo, a sketch, drawing, painting, whatever. An illustration is an image that generally appears in another medium, such as a book or magazine, to illustrate the text. So it's the medium in question ie the book or magazine, that is illustrated. Using it to refer to DYK set images this way just looks awkward and confusing. Gatoclass (talk) 16:10, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK. So I'll revert this too. Yoninah (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Portrait pictured" is fine I think Yoninah, because it's an exact description of the image, which is acceptable. "Illustrated" on the other hand would just have been inaccurate and misleading in the given context IMO. Gatoclass (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Walk-in-the-Water (steamboat)[edit]

On 13 November 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Walk-in-the-Water (steamboat), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Walk-in-the-Water (pictured), which made her maiden voyage from Buffalo to Detroit in 1818, was the first steamboat to run on Lakes Erie, Huron, and Michigan? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Walk-in-the-Water (steamboat)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Many thanks[edit]

A beer for you!
Thanks for your research and edits in the Walk-in-the-Water (steamboat) article — and thanks especially for bringing some important aspects of steamboat history on the Great Lakes to my attention. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 03:10, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Fort Washington Park (Manhattan)[edit]

Gatoclass, you pulled this hook back in October. Can you please check back to see whether the issues you raised have been addressed by the nominator? If you'd prefer, I can always ask for a new reviewer to check out the latest hook proposal, but I thought it was important to make sure you were satisfied with the nominator's explanation, so we don't run the risk of a second pull. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 5[edit]

Hi, the alt you substituted for the quirky slot is not quirky at all. I suggest moving the WYFI hook to the quirky. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yoninah, I don't find the WYFI hook to be quirky at all. But I haven't heard of any birds who can make a growling sound when threatened, so that seems quite quirky to me. Gatoclass (talk) 17:38, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see. But the species name doesn't indicate it's a bird. Oh well, people will probably like the Satanic part. Yoninah (talk) 18:00, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stretched thumbnail[edit]

Hello,

For future reference, such a problem almost certainly stems from a caching issue (typically affecting some users and not others). If repeated purging doesn't help, modifying the image size by one pixel (e.g., from 120px to 119px or 121px) should, given the unlikelihood that a thumbnail with the new dimensions was generated and cached recently.

In this instance, I agree that the wider composition is more suitable regardless, so switching to it was the best option. —David Levy 03:03, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:23, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 4: workshop reopened[edit]

Because of the nature of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case and the importance of the exact wording of remedies, the Arbitration Committee would like to invite public comment and workshopping on the proposed decision, which will be posted soon. Accordingly, the workshop in this case is re-opened and will remain open until Friday, December 13. To opt out of further announcements, please remove yourself from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Der Ring in Minden[edit]

... finally appeared today, - thank you for participating in finding the best hook, "... to listen to the music at the end" which would be a good motto ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that one worked out quite well in the end Gerda. And you certainly got good mileage out of that topic! Well done, Gatoclass (talk) 13:49, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think you could help with the review of Bach Digital? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for A Rubber Band Christmas[edit]

On 25 December 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Rubber Band Christmas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that A Rubber Band Christmas is a novelty album featuring popular Christmas songs played on rubber bands, staplers, and other office equipment? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Rubber Band Christmas. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A Rubber Band Christmas), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 December 2019[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:37, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Parsons Boulevard station[edit]

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK Barnstar[edit]

The DYK Barnstar
Thank you. --evrik (talk) 02:50, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you evrik, that is very kind of you :) Gatoclass (talk) 16:48, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 4 lead hook[edit]

Hi, I understand your switching the image, but please change the beginning of the hook to: * ... that the Mekong Bobtail (example pictured) was among ... Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 16:39, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that would be appropriate Yoninah. The hook reads well enough to me as it is, and it seems to me your proposed change might imply that only one such cat was gifted. Gatoclass (talk) 16:45, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Usually I think I would agree with you Yoninah, but since the hook references a specific number of cats, I'm concerned it might add an unintended element of ambiguity. If the hook said "breeds" it would work, but then, that could open a different can of worms. Gatoclass (talk) 17:16, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that makes sense. I trust your judgment. Yoninah (talk) 17:38, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gatoclass/Archive_26_(2019)&oldid=1211801499"