Wikipedia talk:The Core Contest/Entries/AprilMay2023 archive

Archives

Talk page

Please discuss entries here if needed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:52, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2021

See various sections at Wikipedia talk:The Core Contest for talk so far, but by all means add new comments here. Johnbod (talk) 17:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone like to bicycle?

Too much work for me but as it is not too bad maybe someone would like to add more cites and get it up to good standard Chidgk1 (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Query: viable entry?

Hey. So I massively rewrote 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre back in 2019. Since then, all the stuff I added has only been copy edited. There was 1 new section added (it looks a lot like copy/paste from another article), and 2 or so smallish paragraphs near the end. The vast majority of the article has my fingerprints all over it. So I was thinking: fix all the citation needed spots (there are several) and trim, trim a lot off. Then ship over to WP:FAC for review. [There may also be some stuff near the end that could be updated a little]. Key point: this would almost certainly involve adding nearly zero new content. Is this a viable kinda entry? Thanks § Lingzhi (talk) 03:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Actually I think Black Monday (1987) is better, and the content of that one is over 80% from my edits, but alas, it isn't vital or core... It does need a paragraph or two added before sending it to content review... § Lingzhi (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very quick answer without looking into details: 1) an article with almost half a million views a year is eligible as core (doesn't have to be vital). Edits before the contest do not count, so is there enough you can do after the contest start to compete with models that are pretty shit to start with. It's easier to have "high added encyclopedic content" if the start data point is a bit.. less developed. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! § Lingzhi (talk) 21:45, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does the article Declarative knowledge qualify?

I wanted to ask whether the changes to the article Declarative knowledge qualify for the core challenge. The article itself is not a vital article but it's the most-discussed form of knowledge, which is a level 2 vital article, and it's the main topic of epistemology, which is a level 3 vital article. Since the beginning of the year, it has had a little over 90k page views (including its redirects). It's an omnipresent phenomenon, for example, most of what is found on Wikipedia is an expression of declarative knowledge. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not - I can see you've just greatly expanded (and renamed) it, since the start of the contest. Johnbod (talk) 14:19, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, I went ahead and added it as a new entry. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawals

A few of these are normal. I think they should be recorded somewhere, rather than disappear into the edit history. Maybe at the bottom of the page, which I think we have done in the past. Johnbod (talk) 19:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I've seen participants use <s></s> to denote withdrawn entries while still leaving a record of their participation on TCC subpages. –♠Vamí _IV†♠ 17:16, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree! Strike and putting it at the bottom of the page are both nicer! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:40, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have made it so. –♠Vamí _IV†♠ 18:12, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who is in charge of disbursing awards

Just reminded of this, I never received the money from last year's contest—I corresponded briefly with the Wikimedia UK but they never got back to me. Who is the right person to contact about it now? (t · c) buidhe 04:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The same happened to me. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain I got mine either! Please give WMUK a firm chase. Johnbod (talk) 13:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, thanks for letting us know. We're about the email them again for another matter, so I will be sure to bring this up. Aza24 (talk) 14:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I received an email about this in June from User:Karla Marte(WMUK) with instructions to email her at her WMUK email address. I did so a few hours later. She got back to me in September (citing "technical difficulties" for the delay) and asked for payment details. I replied a few hours later and have not heard back in the six months since then. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that guys. As Aza said, we're on it! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Thebiguglyalien, Phlsph7, Johnbod, and Buidhe: We've reached out to the WMUK and they are happy to send belated awards. I'll email you all this weekend with instructions—it should be a relatively straight forward process. Thank you all for your patience! In the future, let us know right away if your awards don't get processed—that should be our problem to fix, not yours.

Aza24 (talk) 19:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! All they should need to do is send us each an email with a magic link to claim. Johnbod (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed you all separately. I'll let the WMUK know to watch out for your emails. Best – Aza24 (talk) 03:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, WMUK has confirmed that they've recieved new emails from all five winners. They expect to be in contact later this week with the next steps. Thank you all again for your patience. Aza24 (talk) 03:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]