Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2025 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.

For the 2025 WikiCup, we've implemented several changes to the scoring system. The highest-ranking contestants will now receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are now open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants will no longer be eliminated at the end of each round.

The first round will end on 26 February. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gog, I just happened to notice that Gerald Durrell's birthday is 7 January 1925. I don't usually care about TFA, and I know this is very late notice, but a 100-year anniversary is fairly unusual so I thought I'd mention it in case you think it's worth switching out the currently scheduled TFA for that date. I seem to recall it's quite a lot of work to switch out TFAs so no worries if this can't be done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, SchroCat is scheduling January. I would have thought the notice a little tight, but let's see what SC says. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-SchroCat comment) but ironically it's his own FAC that day  :) but as suggested, a centennial doesn't come around very often. I might propose that the PSR article get moved from 7 January (the date of their arrests) to maybe (example) 22 March, the date they were found guilty and sentenced at trial, which is currently vacant. Squares the circle really. /Now pipes down. SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 19:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, No problems with swapping it, and I’ll sort in the morning. Are you able to sort the blurb, or do you want me to do it? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm traveling at the moment and have intermittent online time, but I do have time at the moment to give it a shot. I'll leave a draft on your talk if I can't find the right place to put it, but by all means change it as much as you want. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library)

Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Preston (1648) 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 02:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Gog the Mild, I was wondering if I could gather you opinion on William Martin, 1st Baron Martin. An editor added a Main articles heading with list of main articles relating to this person. I left them a message saying this should be a see also heading and just dot points with links to the articles not using the main article template for each listing. I also removed those links within the article itself. Am I correct in this situation or barked up the wrong tree? Regards Newm30 (talk) 07:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also are succession tables supposed to be in the lower part of the article for general viewing or as the editor has done place in a section which you wouldn't see unless opening that section? Regards Newm30 (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gog and Newm30, I've been dealing with the disruption from this editor for the last month. I've started work on a case at ANI. It's not just this sort of thing at William Martin, it's all over. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ealdgyth, it's good to know that you are on top of this. Newm30, the MoS, in MOS:NAVLAYOUT, states that navboxes, "such as succession boxes", go at the very bottom of articles. As, for example, in "my" FA Constantine III (Western Roman emperor).

Links to other articles. You are correct and Pipera is acting in good faith but is mistaken. MOS:ALSO says

"A "See also" section is a useful way to organize internal links to related or comparable articles and build the web. However, the section itself is not required; many high-quality and comprehensive articles do not have one. The section should be a bulleted list ... Contents: Links in this section should be relevant and limited to a reasonable number. Whether a link belongs in the "See also" section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgment and common sense."

Personally I almost never have See also's in my FAs or GAs.

Does this help? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to respond, articles here are rolled back, and no discussion added, in this case of William Martin, 1st Baron Martin

From my talk page:

William Martin, 1st Baron Martin

They are main articles. Pipera (talk) 07:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply][reply]

I have referred to an administrator for review and advice. Regards Newm30 (talk) 07:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply][reply]

Template:Main - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Main

== Examples ==

Underscores (_) between words are not necessary

• {{Main}} → Error: no page names specified (help).
• {{Main|Article}} → Main article: Article
• {{Main|Article#Section title}} → Main article: Article § Section title
• {{Main|Article#Section|l1=Custom section label}} → Main article: Custom section label
• {{Main|Article1|Article2|Article3}} → Main articles: Article1, Article2, and Article3
• {{Main|Article1|l1=Custom label 1|Article2|l2=Custom label 2}} → Main articles: Custom label 1 and Custom label 2
• {{Main|(15760) 1992 QB1|l1={{mp|(15760) 1992 QB|1}}}} → Main article: (15760) 1992 QB₁

Pipera (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See:

See also: Roman emperor and Senate of the Roman Empire as an example.

They were going to reverse anything I placed there anyway regardless of what I said on the talk page, Pipera (talk) 19:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gog the Mild. That's what I suspected and thanks for the clarification. Yes I agree the editor is acting in good faith and needs some assistance. Regards Newm30 (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to this matter, I have been rolled back, had sources removed that support what I have said, have stated why the article needs to be resolved at Talk:Sibyl of Falaise - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sibyl_of_Falaise#Article_Concerns! and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sibyl_of_Falaise#Vague_history_of_Sybil_being_the_Niece_of_Henry_I_of_England. Please respond to this. Pipera (talk) 19:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also are succession tables supposed to be in the lower part of the article for general viewing or as the editor has done place in a section which you wouldn't see unless opening that section? Regards Newm30 (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply][reply]

That has been fixed.

Pipera (talk) 19:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have spoken to you on my talk page, you were going to reverse it anyway. So why ask me when you were going to do it, I realize you have started the article, but at Wikipedia articles need to have a balanced input, I added my input.

Further the Martin fitz Martin lineage from him ceased to exist and this peerage became extinct. How do I know this I have been researching the Martin and fitz Martin lineage as I am a descendant of Joan Martin his daughter. So, I have an understanding of this tree from a Genealogical Researchers perspective. Pipera (talk) 19:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pipera I did not start the article. I had not seen it until Newm30 mentioned it in this thread. You have no idea what if anything I intend to do. Please stop spamming my user page with irrelevant information; if you wish to post about a specific article, please do so on its talk page. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was responding to Newm30 (talk not you here as they raised the issue here. Pipera (talk) 19:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then the etiquette is to ping them at the start of the message - in case they are not watchlisting the page and so everyone knows who you are addressing.Gog the Mild (talk) 19:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024

• Les Jours and East View Press join the library
• Tech tip: Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --17:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Gog the Mild! The article you nominated, Battle of Morlaix, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]