User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 36
 | 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. |
re: United States Senate election in Maryland, 2018
thank you for correcting this — I'm brand new here and didn't know (sorry!)
Latest revision as of 14:11, January 16, 2018 (edit) (undo) (thanked)
Muboshgu (talk | contribs)
(→Declared: no linking to draft space)
Is there a way to expedite the draft review process for pages related to candidates in this important election?
I submitted Draft:Jerome Segal but it says it will take up to 2 months to review (the primary is in June!)
Thanks for your help :)
Erika9.P (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Erika9.P: Hi. Sorry, there is a considerable backlog there. Also, Wikipedia has WP:NODEADLINE, so I don't imagine anyone would jump it to the head of the line just because of the primary. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Re: January 2018
I actually have a source right now:
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/01/mets-to-sign-adrian-gonzalez.html
--Nemoleeexe (talk) 14:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Nemoleexe: It says it right there in the first sentence: "pending a physical". Gonzalez has back problems. A physical exam is not a guarantee to be passed. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2017 World Series
The article 2017 World Series you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2017 World Series for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Courcelles -- Courcelles (talk) 20:41, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Alert
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 05:09, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Obama page.
Page says during his two years
Should say two terms. Justcody71 (talk) 05:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Fire and Fury
On 22 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fire and Fury, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that research for the book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House reportedly included more than 200 interviews with Donald Trump and his closest associates conducted over 18 months? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Fire and Fury), 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) 01:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Kemba Walker
Hi there. Any chance Kemba Walker could be semi'd for an extended period of time? Following the three days it was semi'd for by you, vandalism has returned. Cheers. DaHuzyBru (talk) 04:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- @DaHuzyBru: Clearly three days was not long enough. I gave it another two weeks. We'll keep increasing increments if necessary. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Lauren Book
The reason I put Florida Senator Lauren Book in the Category:Sex offenders in Florida is because this is her signature issue. Call her office, I’m sure she’d love it if she were on a list so that someone looking for information on sex offenders in Florida would be referred to her. So I’m putting her back in. deisenbe (talk)
- @Deisenbe: That category is clearly for those who have committed sex offenses. She is the victim of it, not a perpetrator. It's a serious BLP violation to reinsert it and if you do it again, I may block you from editing. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
You created Media Madness with an {{under construction}} tag , of which usage guidelines state In general, this template should not be used for new articles with little content. Unless you intend to actively enlarge this in the near future, the tag seems superfluous (basically all subs can be expanded/restructured, and all articles are a work in progress), and may possibly hinder development if other users think you or someone else is actively working on a new version. Please consider removing the template if you have no plans to substantially develop it soon. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Animalparty: Fair point. I thought I'd do more to it than I have and I don't have much time now. I'll remove the tag. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Jim Benedict
On 25 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jim Benedict, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jim Benedict was knocked out during his first professional batting practice? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jim Benedict. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jim Benedict), 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) 12:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:47, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Please cease all communication
I will refrain from saying anything other than: please don't ping me, mention me, or communicate with me on my talk page or message or cause me to be messaged in any way unless you have filed a formal report against me. I'll regard other appearances of your name on notifications as harassment. I hope that is civil and clear. μηδείς (talk) 00:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Medeis: Harassment? Really? You sound like some of the vandals and IPs who have ten edits under their belts. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:47, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Discussion at User talk:Wbm1058#Failed page-swap
You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Wbm1058#Failed page-swap. —usernamekiran(talk) 01:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
For what reason did you reverse my edit to Trump–Russia dossier page?
I added a link to the PDF file for the dossier, and your bot deleted it without explanation. REF: 17:25, 29 January 2018 98.171.162.136 That is very arrogant behavior.
Please cite the Wikipedia policy that permits you to make such arrogant and unwelcome edits without any explaination. If you feel the document violates a copyright, please cite the name of the entity that you believe holds the copyright. Absent, that information, please reinstate my edit.
Thank you.
Best regards, (Redacted) 98.171.162.136 (talk) 18:16, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
DYK for 2018 College Football Playoff National Championship
On 30 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2018 College Football Playoff National Championship, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Alabama Crimson Tide overcame a 13–0 deficit at halftime to win the 2018 College Football Playoff National Championship in overtime? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2018 College Football Playoff National Championship. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2018 College Football Playoff National Championship), 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.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Kevin Towers
On 31 January 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Kevin Towers, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 02:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:United States Senate elections, 2016 and 2017#Requested move 31 January 2018. —GoldRingChip 12:42, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Move discussion for Internal conflict in Bangladesh
An article that you have been involved in editing—Internal conflict in Bangladesh —has been proposed to be renamed and moved. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 16:37, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2017 World Series
The article 2017 World Series you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2017 World Series for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Courcelles -- Courcelles (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).
Administrator changes
None
Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
- Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.
Technical news
- A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee has enacted a change to the discretionary sanctions procedure which requires administrators to add a standardized editnotice when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.
The Signpost: 5 February 2018
- Featured content: Wars, sieges, disasters and everything black possible
- Traffic report: TV, death, sports, and doodles
- Special report: Cochrane–Wikipedia Initiative
- Arbitration report: New cases requested for inter-editor hostility and other collaboration issues
- In the media: Solving crime; editing out violence allegations
- Humour: You really are in Wonderland
Creators of deleted article
Hi.
GOVIND.S.S was deleted a few hours ago. It was also deleted on the same day before. The second time it was created by user:GOVI4. Would you please tell me who created it for the first time? (This is regarding an ongoing SPI.) Regards, —usernamekiran(talk) 17:05, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: Both times it was created by User:GOVI4. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Maybe you would like to delete this article. It is a WP:HOAX. As I said on its talk page- "This article is a hoax. Nothing comes up in a google search for this name, the boxing records and link in the article belong to other fighters, and the article was created in 2011 and at the time claimed this 'boxer' was a world champion. He would have been only 16 at the time. Hoax." Take out the article's one phony reference, its a unreferenced BLP....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- Looks like someone beat me to it. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- This was the second time I have discovered a blatant hoax article that had been up at Wikipedia for a while. Castillo was written almost 7 years ago. The other, an article about a false General Manager of the Boston Red Sox, had been up at least five when I came upon it. But here's my nominee for the all-time best fiction writing at WP
- BA flight 0001 / September 21, 1960 / Mcdonald Douglas MD80 / CO-Pilot Suicide British Airways flight 0001 took off from Manchester Airport in 1960 the co-pilot hits the captian over the head with a fire extinguisher. on board flight attendant Lucy Rivers is shocked and disarms the co-pilot, but not before the plane plummets into a busy high school in Newall Green, Killing 600 on the ground and 200 on flight, 58 passengers survive and 8 cabin crew, co-pilot Sarah Donovan perishes but Pilot Patricia Itshen survives
No aviation accident has ever killed 600 people and the MD80 that crashed in 1960 supposedly wasn't flown until the 1980s. That entry[1] always makes me laugh....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:47, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Yu Darvish
I understand removing Darvish from the roster pages, probably jumped the gun there, but the transaction history on the 2018 page is appropriate I think. It is from verified sourcing that they have an agreement. Lincolning (talk) 20:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Lincolning: News articles that are based on anonymous reporting. Yeah, I know, Darvish and his agents or the team would have refuted it by now if it wasn't true. But we don't know for sure that the deal will be finalized until it gets finalized. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:51, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- I understand. Thanks. Lincolning (talk) 20:52, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of 2017 World Series
The article 2017 World Series you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:2017 World Series for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Courcelles -- Courcelles (talk) 20:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
2018 College football national championship - dispute
Edits were for clarity on the nature of the dispute to include updated rankings and facts regarding those rankings. Additionally, "transitive win" argument removed and CFP ranking moved to second paragraph where it is more pertinent to the ranking information. All added information is factual and pertinent to the discussion. No vandalism is added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.78.106.122 (talk) 17:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Special Counsel investigation (2017–present)
"The explanation for removing that edit is clearly WP:SYNTH / WP:OR)"
where is that explained and justified?soibangla (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Soibangla: I made that revert after seeing it was based on video of Rosenstein, and I must apologize as I say that I did not notice the factcheck.org link after that. It would be OR/Synth if you were making your own conclusions based on the video, but factcheck.org is making them. Yet, I do have to agree with Volunteer Marek that the quote isn't necessary, and is of WP:UNDUE weight to include. There's lots of back and forth quotes, especially with Trump saying "no collusion", and they aren't particularly helpful to include. If you want to have a broader discussion about this, I suggest going to the article's talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:13, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
-- the quote is vital, in fact, as it makes a major characterization of the investigation findings. the solution to *perceived* undue weight is not to delete content, but for others to add content to provide perceived balance; such additions may not happen instantaneously, which might create perception of undue weight, but if other editors find it undue they can/will in time provide additional content for balancesoibangla (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Soibangla: Obviously, you and I don't agree on this. If you want it included, get consensus for it on the article's talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
-- this is a major flaw in wikipedia: the solution to perceived undue weight is the addition of content, not the subtraction, so that readers can weigh as much evidence as possible to draw conclusions. simple, wholesale deletion is a means of censorship by those who may not like the facts, particularly political facts. if facts overwhelmingly support an hypothesis, should that be considered undue if they're not balanced by non-facts? I shudder to think so! soibangla (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Soibangla: No, the undue weight is the addition of the quote, not its omission. Again, go to the article talk page. The greatest strength of Wikipedia is the community discussion. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
-- another WP flaw: talk pages. they're an absolutely inefficient mess, they need to be replaced with a threaded discussion forum
how is a quote an undue weight? I submit there is nothing wrong with that edit whatsoever soibangla (talk) 19:31, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not going to keep responding here. Issues regarding articles should be discussed on the article's talk page, not a user talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
please do not call me stupid
You did that here and you are not even an active participant on the topic being discussed. Xerton (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Xerton: I said "I suggest you stop engaging in this utterly stupid edit war". I called the behavior stupid, not you. Edit warring over such a small thing is pointless, and it will get you blocked if you do it again. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 February 2018
- News and notes: The future is Swedish with a lack of administrators
- Recent research: Politically diverse editors write better articles; Reddit and Stack Overflow benefit from Wikipedia but don't give back
- Arbitration report: Arbitration committee prepares to examine two new cases
- Traffic report: Addicted to sports and pain
- Featured content: Entertainment, sports and history
- Technology report: Paragraph-based edit conflict screen; broken thanks
Speaking of fumbles...
The "thank" button isn't working right now, so thanks for the correction/clarification at the DYK talk page. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 19:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
- Good to know it's not just my "thank" button that doesn't work. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
- There's been a general notice up about it being non-functional since around 8am UTC today... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Luwanda Jenkins
You cited Wikipedia:Too soon as your reason for nominating Jenkins for deletion, but she was notable long before being selected as Madaleno's running mate. See the Awards section: Influential Marylanders, Distinguished Black Marylander, Maryland's Top 100 Women, etc. --MopTop (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
- @MopTop: I also cited WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. Lots of people win random minor awards, that doesn't make them all notable. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
- Why use the word "random" if not to be rude? And why be rude if no underlying bias? And the Nobel or the Pulitzer is hardly the universal standard to which all Wikipedia bios are, or should be, held. If there's a reasonable discussion and the consensus is to delete, I'll accept it, but in future I'd appreciate your not being so high-handed and dismissive. I do not add content to Wikipedia at "random." Ever. --MopTop (talk) 22:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Pat Summit
I'm not really sure how to communicate with you, but Pat Summit no longer has the most NCAA basketball wins ever. A DII coach passed her in 2016.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Statham — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.61.17.205 (talk) 23:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Alexy
You think Alexy is notable enough for a stub, other than him being in the Darvish trade? NYGiantsfan1991 (talk) 04:43, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
- @NYGiantsfan1991: He seems notable enough to keep there, since the coverage is about more than the Darvish trade.[[2][3][4] – Muboshgu (talk) 04:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I increased protection back to TE, as another edit war was going on, but you are probably more familiar with the issues here. Feel free to adjust as you see fit. -- ferret (talk) 02:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Ferret: I just happened to see it on RFPP as you were increasing protection. I agree with your decision; I was going to do the same thing until I saw you had it. The editors could benefit from a new discussion about what to do with the template. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Tim Lincecum
I'm not an expert on the talk page but I would argue with ESPN reporting it as in it is fair to declare lincicum a ranger. http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/85371/rangers-roll-the-dice-but-how-much-can-lincecum-have-left — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liebgod (talk • contribs) 12:31, February 28, 2018 (UTC)
- @Liebgod: The second paragraph of the source starts: "with reports circulating that Lincecum will sign". That means he hasn't signed yet. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:55, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).
Administrator changes
- Lourdes†
- AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
- † Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.
Guideline and policy news
- The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
- Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
- A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
- A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.
Technical news
- CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
- The edit filter has a new feature
contains_allthat edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2018 Steward elections, the following users are our new stewards: -revi, Green Giant, Rxy, There'sNoTime, علاء.
Obituaries
- Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
WikiCup 2018 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.
Our top scorers in round 1 were:
Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
FrB.TG , a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.- Ceranthor, Numerounovedant,
Carbrera, 
Farang Rak Tham and 
Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.
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 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. 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), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
FLC nomination review
Hello,
I can tell you're very active with editing sports, so I wanted to reach out and ask for a review on my FLC with Mr. Show-Me Basketball since it could use additional reviews.
Thanks, Jmnbqb (talk) 13:31, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Followup
You declined semi-protection, to protect against the preventable vandalism of Florin Fodor by an IP address.
No offense, but your suggestion I appropriately warn the IP? Pointless. On the surface, that IP is an SPA, created solely to wikihound me. It is obviously being used by an experienced contributor -- almost certainly sockpuppetry.
When an IP contributor is an obvious SPA, an obvious wikihounder, and almost certainly a sockpuppet, in my opinion the standard warnings are a waste of time.
The IP excised the image, yet another time.
Protecting good faith contributors from having their time wasted by vandals? It is one of the aspects where wikipedia procedures are weak. It took months for my last wikihounders to be indefinitely blocked. Geo Swan (talk) 00:18, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Geo Swan: If it's a sockpuppet, then SPI is still a better place to go with RFPP. If it's one trouble user, getting rid of the trouble user stops the bad editing, and therefore page protection isn't necessary. You're not doing all that you could be doing in warning the IP and making your case for either AIV or SPI. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:58, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Protection of David Lopez-Carr
Hello,
I first want to thank you very much for protecting this page. An IP just posted on the talk page basically a copy and paste of the page + the fluffy content that I had been reverting because it was unsourced (which is why the page was protected in the first place): [5]. This is the same content as the other IPs posted [6], [7]. I denied their request and told them to find sources but I believe that when the protection wears off on the 8th the IPs will be back at it. If you do not feel it warrants an increase in protection time would you mind keeping an eye on it? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:24, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
- @HickoryOughtShirt?4: I have added it to my watchlist. If the vandalism resumes and I haven't reprotected it, that means I didn't see it yet, so ping me and I'll be there. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Muboshgu, I am wondering if you could offer your thoughts, perhaps even briefly, to Talk:Sammy Sosa#Haitian ancestry down where it says third opinion.
The argument is that Miniaturas del béisbol by Héctor J. Cruz of Listin Diario, is a "weak source" even though its contents therein agree with multiple sources in regards to Haitian athletes in the Dominican Republic, hence why I disagree; citing that "such sources like this one could not contribute to Wikipedia biographies of living people because there is no self-identification given (autobiography)", which is a flat out false interpretation of WP:BLPSPS. If that was the case, 95% of our Wikipedia articles would not have any biographic content. I think the solution is clear, the source in question needs to be verified by an additional source.
Based on a faulty and current third opinion (actually "fourth opinion"), Osplace has taken the opportunity to not only venture to other articles to remove this source, but also did so to articles which had supporting source(s), all why slandering me for supposedly "[Haitianizing] Dominican athletes", citing Luisito Pié's article, which mind you is undeniably of Haitian descent and was even mocked and degraded by a Dominican news reporter for hoisting the Dominican flag during the Olympics with all sorts of racial slurs [8]; so not sure why he was singling him out on me.
Sammy Sosa's ancestry is minor in comparison to the bigger scope here, which is the unknown status of Dominican athletes of Haitian descent and their contributions to the sport bridged between the Dominican Baseball system and the MLB that I hope to help uncover. (It's enough for ESPN to write a whole feature story about it The complicated state of Haitian Dominicans in MLB)
If the source in question [9] (a 2008 achieve from a reputable newspaper publishing) was such a "weak" one, as our third opinionator is suggesting, then it would not agree with sources like El Dinero and Hoy, two reputable publications (not to mention a "second" editor from Listin Diario [10]), in terms of the statuses of Haitian athletes in the Dominican Baseball system, which from a biography perspective too, share many of the same names.
Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thank you kindly. Savvyjack23 (talk) 03:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
- You got a third opinion from User:Collect. I don't have anything to add to that. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Detroit Tigers /* 2018 */ Chris Bosio hire (revert)
Normally I would agree that a coaching decision is of little importance but Chris Bosio was let go by and poached off of a 2016 World Champion, 2017 NL Central Champion team. It is a significant hire with. You're the more experienced editor and I'll defer to your judgement but in a year of no significant player signings it is the most important non-managerial move of the year (so far) for the Tigers. Nonsuch Ned (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Edits at Donald Trump
I did not make those edits -- either you are mistaken, or someone has stolen my ID. I will investigate. algocu (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Jackie Wallace
On 10 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jackie Wallace, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jackie Wallace told the coach of the Los Angeles Rams to "kiss his ass" for failing to field him in Super Bowl XIV, his final NFL game? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jackie Wallace. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jackie Wallace), 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.
— Maile (talk) 00:11, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your welcome
I am not of the world of computers, and barely know my way aroynd here. You sent me a welcome, and some helpful pointers. Not sure how long it will take me re the latter; give me some time :) .
Thank you!
Vcuttolo (talk) 07:34, 11 March 2018 (UTC) Vcuttolo (talk) 07:34, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Be patient and wait next time
Next time something like this happens, please be patient and wait until official sources list a date. Now, as it turns out, we have an official date for Tillerson leaving: March 31. Although all responsibilities are now going to Sullivan, Tillerson is still SOS until March 31. It was breaking news this morning with very little details, so patience is needed and don't just jump to conclusions that the day it's announced is automatically his last day. Corky 19:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- Reliable sources changed their story during the day. We had all followed due diligence. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Questions about my stats
A few things... First congrats on your successful administer run! I really feel bad that I don't watch that notice well enough to even have known you were running as I most certainly would have voted a strong Yes. Next, reading your illustrious page I thought that after 10 years here I should try and gussy mine up a tad. Looking at the different awards, etc., that you are using I did look into my stats and found that I've made over 21,000 edits so I gave myself an award for that. But some things from that stat page do not seem accurate. For example, Elizabeth Warren where I have done a lot of work, including being one of the three that worked on her GA, is not mentioned. There are quite a few others, Pullman porter (or Gandydancer as far as that goes 
) for example, where I mostly wrote the entire article, that aren't mentioned on my stat page, though perhaps that's because WP does not consider them important enough? Any thoughts/suggestions? Gandydancer (talk) 19:20, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gandydancer: Which site are you looking at? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:34, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- I got it from near the bottom of your user page. Substituting my name I found this: [[11]] Gandydancer (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gandydancer: It lists the nine pages you've made the most edits to, all of which you've edited 291 times or more. You've edited EW's page 196 times, and Pullman porter 112 times. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:07, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- I got it from near the bottom of your user page. Substituting my name I found this: [[11]] Gandydancer (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- I continue to try to work on my user page. Looking at the Pullman porter page I found that while I am listed as having the most edits, billinghurst is listed as the leading editor when it comes to copy added to the article, even though he had made only one small edit. I asked him for help and he said he had no idea what I was talking about and that it was not his problem but a problem with the editor that had compiled the graph, and that I should contact that editor. I was disappointed in his reply since I thought that admins are supposed to be here to help us, not brush us off. Can you tell me who I should go to for help in fixing this problem? Sorry if I'm being a pest but I would like my user page to list only articles for which I actually am largely responsible for, or for more complex articles share the responsibility with one or perhaps two others. Gandydancer (talk) 18:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gandydancer: The community is here to assist with community questions; whereas administrators will assist with the matters within their scope; toolmakers will generally assist with the tools that they have made. Please don't hold others accountable for things in which they have neither knowledge nor influence, and here it isn't even a wikipedia issue. Please address your issue to the xtools toolmakers. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Gandydancer: xtools apparently is getting choked up due to the suppressed message. It would be worth mentioning that in your report. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
- billinghurst please don't say that I am holding you responsible for the mistake since I do not feel that way and I did not imply that it was your fault. It is very embarrassing for me to be in this situation because my skills are very limited and I have no idea how to go about correcting the problem and I'd just as soon forget it. Gandydancer (talk) 00:13, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
- I continue to try to work on my user page. Looking at the Pullman porter page I found that while I am listed as having the most edits, billinghurst is listed as the leading editor when it comes to copy added to the article, even though he had made only one small edit. I asked him for help and he said he had no idea what I was talking about and that it was not his problem but a problem with the editor that had compiled the graph, and that I should contact that editor. I was disappointed in his reply since I thought that admins are supposed to be here to help us, not brush us off. Can you tell me who I should go to for help in fixing this problem? Sorry if I'm being a pest but I would like my user page to list only articles for which I actually am largely responsible for, or for more complex articles share the responsibility with one or perhaps two others. Gandydancer (talk) 18:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Louise Slaughter
Which specific statements are you asking to be cited?JTRH (talk) 16:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
- @JTRH: Many of those paragraphs have no citations at all. So, all of those. This article can be posted to Wikipedia's main page by WP:ITN/C, but it needs all items to be sourced first. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Please don't change established date format used in an article, as you did in this edit. The article uses ISO 8601-style dates in the citations, and this is explicitly allowed by MOS:DATEFORMAT. Per WP:DATERET, this should not be changed without getting consensus on the talk page. Seeing as you have not made any effort at all to discuss this matter, I've reverted your edit. Please don't go to random articles and change the date format from one allowed format to another. Not only is it pointless, it's explicitly discouraged by the very guideline that your edit summary references. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- @NinjaRobotPirate: That article clearly uses mdy: date in the infobox, "two years later, on August 23, 2000", etc. Also, that page is for an American-made movie strongly based in Los Angeles, so WP:NATIONALTIES apply. Such a minor script-based change does not require talk page consensus, otherwise there wouldn't be a script for it. I am not going to waste time requesting mdy or dmy dates on talk pages. You shouldn't waste my time or your time reverting these edits. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, the article uses American-style dates in prose, but the MOS allows us to use ISO 8601 date format in citations; this should not be changed without consensus. Your edits are pointless, and are discouraged by the very guideline in your summary. I like using ISO 8601 date format for citations, and I resent having some random wikignome come in and disruptively change the date format. This is why the MOS says to gain consensus for these sorts of changes. Keep in mind that you're responsible for whatever a script does; just because a script allows you to violate a guideline doesn't mean that you should. If for some reason you think ISO 8601 format dates should be forbidden on Wikipedia, you can start an RFC about that at the village pump. Until then, it is disruptive to strip them out. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- @NinjaRobotPirate: Nowhere in MOS:DATEFORMAT does it say not to do what I did. In fact, the subsection of it that I've mentioned, MOS:DATETIES, suggests that I indeed should have. MOS:DATERET says that if the article "predominantly" uses one format to keep that, but as I showed you, it uses two! So we should choose one, and mdy is the common sense format to use. Common sense does not require talk page consensus. Your comment "I resent having some random wikignome come in and disruptively change the date format" is odd to me, as though WikiGnomes are disruptive? By making such a small change to standardize an article to one format? I think we get at the heart of what's going on here: you WP:DONTLIKEIT. And you're claiming some sort of WP:OWNership of the article in the process. Even if you didn't like it, you really should've let it be. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, it uses two formats – because ISO 8601 date formats are explicitly allowed in citations. Please see MOS:DATEFORMAT. The guideline allows for this format to be used, and there is no equivalent for in-prose use. That means that articles that use ISO 8601 date in citations will have two date formats. There is nothing wrong with this, and it is allowed by the guideline. If you don't understand this, I'm not sure how to make it any more clear for you. If you don't understand the MOS, please just leave date formats alone. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- @NinjaRobotPirate: I could turn this around to you to ask if you understand MOS:DATETIES, but again going back to my initial reply, this whole thing is a waste of time. We're going in circles here. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, it uses two formats – because ISO 8601 date formats are explicitly allowed in citations. Please see MOS:DATEFORMAT. The guideline allows for this format to be used, and there is no equivalent for in-prose use. That means that articles that use ISO 8601 date in citations will have two date formats. There is nothing wrong with this, and it is allowed by the guideline. If you don't understand this, I'm not sure how to make it any more clear for you. If you don't understand the MOS, please just leave date formats alone. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- @NinjaRobotPirate: Nowhere in MOS:DATEFORMAT does it say not to do what I did. In fact, the subsection of it that I've mentioned, MOS:DATETIES, suggests that I indeed should have. MOS:DATERET says that if the article "predominantly" uses one format to keep that, but as I showed you, it uses two! So we should choose one, and mdy is the common sense format to use. Common sense does not require talk page consensus. Your comment "I resent having some random wikignome come in and disruptively change the date format" is odd to me, as though WikiGnomes are disruptive? By making such a small change to standardize an article to one format? I think we get at the heart of what's going on here: you WP:DONTLIKEIT. And you're claiming some sort of WP:OWNership of the article in the process. Even if you didn't like it, you really should've let it be. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, the article uses American-style dates in prose, but the MOS allows us to use ISO 8601 date format in citations; this should not be changed without consensus. Your edits are pointless, and are discouraged by the very guideline in your summary. I like using ISO 8601 date format for citations, and I resent having some random wikignome come in and disruptively change the date format. This is why the MOS says to gain consensus for these sorts of changes. Keep in mind that you're responsible for whatever a script does; just because a script allows you to violate a guideline doesn't mean that you should. If for some reason you think ISO 8601 format dates should be forbidden on Wikipedia, you can start an RFC about that at the village pump. Until then, it is disruptive to strip them out. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Wayne Huizenga
On 25 March 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Wayne Huizenga, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Proposed deletions
The pages I made are all players that will most likely be drafted in the top 10/15 picks of the upcoming draft and would have had pages made in a few months anyway which is why I went ahead in did it. There were less notable players than the ones I made that already had pages so I figured they were notable enough. I'm happy to improve the pages so they aren't deleted but I might need help on what I need to add or change.– Malmmf (talk) 20:05, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Malmmf: "There were less notable players than the ones I made that already had pages" = WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I'll look for those and nominate them if appropriate. The ones I just tagged certainly don't meet the notability guidelines. It seems like a case of WP:TOOSOON. But if you find more sources that meet WP:RS, then maybe they don't need to be deleted. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
- I will try to find more reliable sources. If they are deleted, however, would they be okay to repost the pages once the draft is a lot closer or after they are drafted since they have more notability? Thanks for the info– Malmmf (talk) 24:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
- That would be nice. Thanks for all of your help. I started trying to find better articles for Swaggerty and I’ll continue that for the other 3 as well.– Malmmf (talk) 14:30, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Malmmf: I think that's a better approach then deleting the articles, especially as more coverage may arise during the 2018 college season, since it will WP:PRESERVE what you have done. I'll do that now, without leaving redirects. So, Travis Swaggerty, for instance, will be located at Draft:Travis Swaggerty. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:33, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
- Great. Thanks!– Malmmf (talk) 14:34, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Bullpen car
On 29 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bullpen car, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Opening Day for the Seattle Mariners in 1982 was delayed when a player hid the keys to the bullpen car? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bullpen car. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bullpen car), 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.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018
- News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.
- Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.
- Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers
- Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs
- Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.
- Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.
- Humour: WikiWorld Reruns
A friendly caution: it's not a good idea for an administrator to revert as many times as you have today, particularly in what appears to be an MOS dispute, which is almost always not worth fighting about.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Yes, you're right. I can lose sight of that from time to time. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- And yet you're continuing. The edit war on the article is already disruptive. If I hadn't edited the article a while ago, I'd fully protect it and warn all the participants about potential blocks. If you're going to have a lame MOS edit war, you should at least do it on an article that isn't as prominent currently as the Pompeo article.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:29, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Right right right, too easy to get caught up. I was good over the weekend. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, I've followed your lead over at John J. Sullivan (diplomat) and others are still adding small font sizes to the "acting"... Corky 18:12, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Corkythehornetfan: Change is hard. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:29, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, I've followed your lead over at John J. Sullivan (diplomat) and others are still adding small font sizes to the "acting"... Corky 18:12, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
- Right right right, too easy to get caught up. I was good over the weekend. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- And yet you're continuing. The edit war on the article is already disruptive. If I hadn't edited the article a while ago, I'd fully protect it and warn all the participants about potential blocks. If you're going to have a lame MOS edit war, you should at least do it on an article that isn't as prominent currently as the Pompeo article.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:29, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Tyler Kinley
Hello! Your submission of Tyler Kinley at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Bagumba (talk) 11:49, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Greg Holland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeff Montgomery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).
Administrator changes
- 331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG
- Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando
Guideline and policy news
- Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
- Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
- The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
- The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.
Technical news
- There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.
Miscellaneous
- A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
- The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.
ITN recognition for 2018 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship Game
On 4 April 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2018 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship Game, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 01:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
"Is this alt blurb a joke?"
- – Yes, but it's also a serious comment on the plethora of sports events posted on ITN in recent years. I think you should put it back. Sca (talk) 20:25, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Sca: I think that if you have a serious comment to make on the sporting events that are posted at ITN, WT:ITN and/or WT:ITN/R are the appropriate venues for that criticism, not an altblurb on ITN/C. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Sca: Agreed, ITNC is not a sandbox for users to write pointed bollocks. I would suggest you take a trout and if you do something like that again, expect to be blocked, as I will certainly be checking up on that kind of abuse of ITNC. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Pending changes
If an article is under pending changes review, and you happen to not put an Edit Summary, do not be surprised if it's reverted. There is nothing to suggest "My mistakenly not including an edit summary is not a good reason to revert my edit" when the article is specifically a target of vandalism.
That being said, you should have accepted or reverted the existing edits that were being piled up before you made any additional edits. Note, I reverted "4 pending edits" not simply 1. And if by chance, you haven't the ability to approve edits, then you should have still assumed yours was not the only edit(s) that was reverted. It was combined 4 edits. DA1 (talk) 16:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- @DA1: You reverted four edits citing WP:FIES, while two of the four edits did have an edit summary. Whether or not I accept or reverted pending edits, you were not careful enough in assessing the edits you reverted. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- Neither did you at the time. Me reverting an edit is precisely because I expect to leave it at the hands of reliable users (as opposed to anonymous IPs), which for some reason you hadn't done (leading in no way for me to assume whether you were even a reviewer or not). Either way, you're not supposed to revert accepted revisions, you should have made a separate edit. DA1 (talk) 16:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- @DA1: My edit undoing your edit was automatically accepted. I think you should worry less about what I'm doing and worry more about being more thorough when you revert/reject edits. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:45, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- I am not worrying about what you're doing. That's you putting yourself on a pedestal. I was merely trying to explain why I made the revert in the first place, and how come you didn't accept the pending reverts on backlog. Your revert being "automatically accepted" doesn't mean anything, mine was too when I reverted yours (remember?), its automated. DA1 (talk) 03:35, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- @DA1: I'm not putting myself on any pedestal. I'm reminding you that when you revert edits, you're responsible for making sure you're doing it properly. In this instance, you did not. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- May I remind you too to put an Edit Summary on protected pages to avoid the risk of being reverted. Lets end it here. DA1 (talk) 13:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- @DA1: I'm not putting myself on any pedestal. I'm reminding you that when you revert edits, you're responsible for making sure you're doing it properly. In this instance, you did not. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- I am not worrying about what you're doing. That's you putting yourself on a pedestal. I was merely trying to explain why I made the revert in the first place, and how come you didn't accept the pending reverts on backlog. Your revert being "automatically accepted" doesn't mean anything, mine was too when I reverted yours (remember?), its automated. DA1 (talk) 03:35, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
- @DA1: My edit undoing your edit was automatically accepted. I think you should worry less about what I'm doing and worry more about being more thorough when you revert/reject edits. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:45, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- Neither did you at the time. Me reverting an edit is precisely because I expect to leave it at the hands of reliable users (as opposed to anonymous IPs), which for some reason you hadn't done (leading in no way for me to assume whether you were even a reviewer or not). Either way, you're not supposed to revert accepted revisions, you should have made a separate edit. DA1 (talk) 16:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Donald Trump
Just a heads up, the article is under consensus required. Certified Gangsta challenged Drmies addition with a revert. PackMecEng (talk) 18:29, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
- Indeed that edit appears a violation, but of course "Hillary is original birther" is a ludicrous statement; unfortunately, there is no exception for that Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah it's a bit of a crap shoot these days. Hard to make changes without having to run though the whole edit history to see if you are in violation. PackMecEng (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for notifying me...
Muboshgu, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to notify me about the potential deletion of the category I created regarding World Series-winning managers. Though I respectfully disagree with you on this on the grounds of historical significance, I truly appreciate you contacting me in a respectful manner. Please let me know if the aforementioned category will be deleted or not. Thank you again for everything. Mr. Brain (talk) 20:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
MOS:ACCESS#Text/MOS:FONTSIZE corrections
I see that you have been correcting violations of MOS:ACCESS#Text/MOS:FONTSIZE, this can be done more easily with WP:AWB if you are willing to download and use that. Happy to provide you with the regex to deal with the more complicated cases. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:55, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Emir of Wikipedia: That's a good idea. I have AWB, haven't used it in some time. I would love the script that would help me apply this fix more efficiently. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- The find and replace for the <small> and </small> is simply to put them in separate find boxes and then leave the replace boxes empty. Regarding the more complicate case of the template we need to use regex,
\{\{\s*(?:HW\-small|small)\s*\|([^\{\}]+)\}\}
is put in the find box and$1
with the regex option ticked. - It is your choice on how to decide what articles to but personally what I have done is biographies via the birth year categories reverse chronologically on a basis that articles about people born recently are more likely to be read (I know this is not 100% accurate but it is an easy way to make a list) and therefore that my edits are more likely to have helped a reader. A disclaimer about the regex given is that it only fixes instances that use template:hw-small and template:small even though other templates like template:smaller exist, but considering that I have over 30k articles to look through and I am not even into the 1980s I think I don't need to worry about running out of articles to help. I also suggest that you have skip on if you do add a large list of articles otherwise you'll be clicking for so long before getting to an article to make a replacement. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Emir of Wikipedia: Thanks! I'll give it a try later. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- Depending upon how big your list is you might want to try using pre-parse mode to remove skippable entries. I'm trying this out now for myself. Good luck either way. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Emir of Wikipedia: Thanks! I'll give it a try later. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- The find and replace for the <small> and </small> is simply to put them in separate find boxes and then leave the replace boxes empty. Regarding the more complicate case of the template we need to use regex,
DYK for Mike Marjama
On 8 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mike Marjama, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mike Marjama overcame an eating disorder to make it to Major League Baseball? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mike Marjama. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mike Marjama), 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.
— Maile (talk) 00:13, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Greg Holland
I delinked WCU because it was the second time in the article that it was mentioned. The first time was linked. I thought that was how it was supposed to be on Wikipedia- that you have a link the first time it's mentioned, but not every time. Lbr123 (talk) 20:52, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Lbr123: Ah I see. You're right, except for that the lead is an exception. A link should be presented once in the body and not linked again, which is what is happening at Greg Holland. The lead summarizes the body, so a link in the lead should be linked again in the body, on the first usage. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:56, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu: OK. I understand. However I think that it should be "Catamounts" and not "Western Carolina Catamounts." I was just trying to get rid of grammatical redundancy. It still links to "Western Carolina Catamounts." What do you think about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbr123 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Trump and Golf
Re this, they were issued the DS alert three days ago after the exact same violation of the ArbCom restrictions. This warrants a DS in my opinion, as they clearly don't care about any silly old ArbCom restrictions. Sure, we can just keep reverting them until they get tired, but then what are the restrictions and the DS for? ―Mandruss ☎ 16:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Mandruss: Good point, I did not scroll up high enough to see that message. I've also never blocked a user due to DS before, so I want to make sure I do that properly, if I do. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:54, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- Reading through Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions, am I WP:INVOLVED because I reverted the edit? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:55, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Mandruss: I see this has been sorted, for the next 48 hours anyway. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| Thank you for all that you do to contribute. Dr. Jonathan Sanchez (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2018 (UTC) |
Retired players
I was just curious what rule you use for updating player articles to retired, I use the two year rule of no recent transaction then I list them as retired but for Kyle Skipworth you listed him as no longer active by the two year rule he should still have the rest of the season before he should be updated. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 19:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Kingryan227: There's no hard and fast rule, but in Skipworth's case, I Googled him and found nothing after the outright. No minor league signings or rumor stories talking about his interest in signing. Considering that players of Skipworth's level often fade away without any announcement, and how aggressive some editors were in listing Tim Lincecum as retired only to be proven wrong, I don't think we have to wait for two full years for a guy like Skipworth. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Muboshgu (talk) Yeah I understand that there's no rule I just feel that is a solid thing because players sometimes take a year off then return to an independent league team for example Phillippe Aumont I know we don't technically have to wait but I think 2 years is fair because he could possibly show up in the Atlantic League or something that is where most players go, or to the American Association. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingryan227 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Kingryan227: It's not unfair to wait. Of course, the worst thing is what happened with Lincecum, where we simply had to revert any text about being a "former player", and removing the "final" lines from the infobox (or rather, commenting them out in case they do indeed fail to make it back to the majors). It's not a major deal either way. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:41, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Muboshgu (talk) So what do you suggest to use to write someone off as retired because I am planning doing a lot of editing coming up and it would come in handy. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 20:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Kingryan227: Could be the two year line you mentioned, could be simply not considering those who have been mentioned in the press as wanting a return to be retired. Hard to say. Reminds me of the old SCOTUS test of "I'll know it when I see it". – Muboshgu (talk) 22:02, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
BLP name
Thank you for the protection. I also posted to BLPN, but wonder if you could look at this related matter: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Eric_Greitens_-_revdel?. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| WHAT A HERO YOU ARE Nate Legend (talk) 20:53, 12 April 2018 (UTC) |
Tyler Webb
Hey, I don't really know what you want me to do with articles like Tyler Webb he just got claimed off waivers, he was with the Brewers for awhile I'm not adding him being claimed by a new team into another teams subsection that just doesn't make sense so I don't know what you expected me to do. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 19:35, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Kingryan227: How about the way I resectioned it? The Pirates subsection was the big problem, since at least the Padres part can be expanded in the future. One sentence isn't a paragraph, let alone a subsection. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
I agree the Pirates section was too short and that makes sense I still don't like the Brewers and Padres sections combined with each other it just bothers me haha Since it is a totally new team that he is at least gonna play in the minors for unlike the pirates section he never played except for spring training. Kingryan227 (Decrees • Acts) 19:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Tyler Kinley
Hello! Your submission of Tyler Kinley at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! —Bagumba (talk) 08:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Jack Raymond (radio host), which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the file. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —Compassionate727 (T·C) 13:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Invitation to WikiProject Portals
The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.
You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.
There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.
Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.
It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.
The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.
A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.
We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.
Let's do this.
See ya at the WikiProject!
Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 10:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sean Manaea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All-Star break (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Kris Bryant
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kris Bryant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Courcelles -- Courcelles (talk) 03:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Ian Conyers
Good morning! I wanted to touch base with you regarding the Ian Conyers page. Mr. Conyers political angling to announce Congressman Conyers retirement, ahead of the Congressman doing so, has been national news and a major understory of the 13th Congressional District. Mr. Conyers is a distant relative of Congressman Conyers, who hardly has any personal knowledge of the Congressman. His use of the Conyers name to try to beat Mr. Conyers son has been written about and published nationally (The Hill, Politico, The Detroit News). This makes it more than simply gossip and inuendo, but a documented aspect of the campaign. It is also protected speech under Sullivan v. Times. I removed the phrase in question you cited, take a look now. Obviously Mr. Conyers attempted to remove the unflattering material but, he cannot edit the truth, simply because he does not like it!Norris.michaelj (talk) 11:42, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Norris.michaelj: We need to be aware of maintaining WP:NPOV, and while I understand what you're saying, some of what you just wrote above needs verification. Is he indeed a "distant relative, who hardly has any personal knowledge of the Congressman"? Where is that from? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
As reported, in the Detroit News, "Ian Conyers of Detroit — the 88-year-old congressman’s great-nephew" the article continues: "Conyers’ endorsement of his son was seen as a snub of Sen. Conyers, the great-nephew who told the New York Times and ABC News early Tuesday about the congressman’s planned retirement.
The potential family feud quickly escalated when Sen. Conyers retweeted – but later deleted – a link to a 2010 blog highlighting controversial social media posts by Conyers III and suggesting his family “needs to do damage control immediately.”
The posts included multiple photos of Conyers III, then underage, posing with bottles of alcohol, including one picture of him holding Moet behind the steering wheel of a Cadillac.
Sen. Conyers urged the local and national media to take “a thorough look at all candidates” vying to replace his great-uncle.
The early drama in the race is “disheartening and disappointing,” said 13th District Democratic Party Chairman Jonathan Kinloch, “but I can imagine from their perspective a lot of emotions are flying.”
Kinloch said he expects “one of the biggest (candidate) filings we’ve seen in recent memory” as Democrats scramble for a safe seat that rarely becomes vacant."
As reported in Detroit Metro Times https://www.metrotimes.com/news-hits/archives/2017/12/05/family-feud-brews-in-a-likely-crowded-race-to-succeed-conyers
"The rookie Michigan state senator stole his great uncle's thunder in telling national media outlets about Rep. Conyers' planned retirement before it was formally announced. And according to the Detroit News, Sen. Conyers seemed pretty miffed after his great uncle said he'd be endorsing his son, Conyers III, over him. The daily paper reports that Sen. Conyers retweeted a link to an old blog post that showed social media posts of Conyers III posing with booze before he was of legal drinking age. One image apparently showed him holding a bottle of Moet behind the steering wheel of a Cadillac.
The newspaper reports that Sen. Conyers urged “a thorough look at all candidates” entering the race."
As reported by News Channel 3 WMMT:
Moments before Conyers announced he was retiring, State Senator Ian Conyers, his grandnephew, announced he was going to run for his uncle's seat, but Conyers chose a family favorite Tuesday morning, saying he would back his son, John Conyers III.Norris.michaelj (talk)
Your GA nomination of Kris Bryant
The article Kris Bryant you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Kris Bryant for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Courcelles -- Courcelles (talk) 19:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Sachio Kinugasa
On 25 April 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Sachio Kinugasa, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Vanamonde (talk) 15:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Adding stuff that has not been archived
Hack Wilson
I'm sorry I missed the deadline on the Hack Wilson GA status because I'm on vacation and had no time to log on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orsoni (talk • contribs) 00:10, May 16, 2012
Merry Christmas
AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
tiller54 is removing for partisan purposes.. please check the nyc campaign finance board for confirmation of my valid candidacy.
- Walter N Iwachiw, RN SPNP SFNP,Businessman, CUNY/Concorde University of Law Educated, Owner of WNIS Companies (Telecom, Telemedicine, Assisted Living, Nursing/Hospital Facilities, Oil/Gas Exploration, Computers/Software/Hardware/Programing, Internet, Power/Internet Infrastructure, Personal/Computer Security, Residential/Commercial/Manufacturing Development, Solar/Fuel Cell/Nuclear Power Generation, Space Business Enterprises, Contract vendor to NYC Brd of Education, Contract Vendor to NYS BOCES). First Responder to WTC injured, Common Law Wife Roxanne RN also first responder but deceased from injuries, Step sister in Common Law Diane of NYS Dept. of Taxation WTC Deceased. World Network International Services Inc awarded 496 Million WTC URIR Grant for fiber restoral and installation below Canal St. World Network International Services Inc. initial awardee of MTA Cellular WIFI RFP, Hudson Yards High Bidder, Port Authority 2001 WTC 99 year lease high bidder, and MTA bidder for commuter wifi, http://www.nyccfb.info/candidates/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobiography_of_Walter_N_Iwachiw http://www.iwachiw4mayor.net/ [1][2][3][4]
just bring up the nyc campaign finance page and search for candidates...don't participate in censorsip by partisan actors help free elections...
Refs
Sally Jewell
The Senate confirmed "Sarah Jewell" of Washington to be Interior Secretary: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/floor_activity/floor_activity.htm http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r113:@FIELD(FLD003+d)+@FIELD(DDATE+20130410) http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00094
Happy Memorial Day!
_near_Washington_DC.jpg)
AutomaticStrikeout ? is wishing you a Happy Memorial Day! On this day, we recognize our fellow countrymen who have fought our nation's battles for the past several hundred years, protecting our freedom and safety. We remember those who paid the ultimate price and we support those who continue to willingly sacrifice their safety for the sake of their country. Happy Memorial Day!
Share this message by adding {{subst:Memorial Day}} to a fellow American's talk page.
Happy Holidays!
User:Sportsguy17/Happy Holidays 2013
Jarred Cosart and Martin Prado
Sorry I forgot the source :P thank you for reverting but I have reverted back to my versions with the sources
Nomination of Todd Takayoshi for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Todd Takayoshi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Todd Takayoshi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Babin updates
Thank you very much for your help and attention to this matter.
Wikiblanks- Ray
Awesomeday2015
I just want to tell u I'm awesomeday2015 and I have a big question for u the things that I have edited about mlb things are true I would just like to now why u keep changing it back to the original leave a message response below
Dean Smith
| On 8 February 2015, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dean Smith, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. |
Planned Parenthood shooting
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
A page you started (Rick Becker) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Rick Becker, Muboshgu!
Wikipedia editor Xaxing just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Fix the image in the infobox bit. Seems it is non existent on Wikipedia. Kudos
To reply, leave a comment on Xaxing's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Request for Aroldis Chapman help
Dear Muboshgu, I am writing to you in your capacity as a baseball expert. I have been trying to insert two sentences on the Wrigley Field DJ incident involving Aroldis Chapman on the Aroldis Chapman page. As it was reported in the Chicago Tribune (cited) along with that hotbed-of-defamation USA Today, I don't see why this should be controversial--it was certainly the most memorable point of his career so far as a Cub (if you haven't heard of the incident, a quick Google or reading my text will explain).
The issue is that someone (FoCuS something) keeps deleting what I added and says I have an "agenta" [sic], am defamatory, am a vandal, not NPOV, whatever. I don't have the Wikipedia cred to protest, but I figure you do. Could you take a quick look and decide whether suppressing this is really in Wikipedia's best interest? I am a rabid fan and would like an archival record of important events related to Cubs players, and this seems like one. I think what I put is neutral and drawn directly from the Tribune article, but if it can be written even more neutrally, go for it by all means. Cheers, enrico_suave.
4th GA Cup - Wrap Up
 Hello, GA Cup competitors! Saturday, April 1 concluded the 2016-2017 GA Cup. 64 reviews were completed by our finalists. Although the backlog increased by 42 over the reviewing period instead of declining, the increase suggests that the contest is encouraging editors to nominate articles for review. Congratulations to Shearonink, who is the winner of the Cup, finishing with 672 points! Once again, just as in last round, this is more than the point totals for all the other competitors combined! It was a close race for second place between Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, who achieved 164 points, and Sturmvogel_66, who earned 150. Though Sturmvogel_66 reviewed one more article than Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga managed to earn 14 points more due to reviewing older articles. Our two wildcard competitors, Kees08 and Chris troutman, came in fourth and fifth, respectively. There were some bumps in the competition this time: The sign-up deadline and the first round were both extended due to fewer competitors signing up then was planned for. And there were delays in tallying points and getting out the newsletter. The judges apologize for this latter difficulty. Lastly, mid-way through the competition we bid farewell to Zwerg Nase, who stepped down from their position as judge due to other commitments. Information about the Final can be found here. Thank you to all of our competitors, and congrats to our winners! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
I nominated this page for deletion. I saw that you had a small edit war with the page creator (who then deleted your notability tag). Please feel free to comment.
Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress#Capitals
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress#Capitals. —GoldRingChip 12:51, 15 May 2018 (UTC)