Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. 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. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 45

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2021 storming of the United States Capitol on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey I was just telling you that there was 12 tornadoes in January 4 last night 3 confirmed 2 in AL according to the nws in Birmingham so stop deleting the things I put ok stop or I will request for your account to be terminated. High voltage highlights (talk) 21:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Give me a valid source and drop the attitude. United States Man (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

https://www.weather.gov/bmx/event_01252021 OK here ya go 🙂 and I wasn't mad just asking. High voltage highlights (talk) 22:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

That EF0 tornado is from December... United States Man (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh ok I didn't know people on Twitter said it was secondary tornado. High voltage highlights (talk) 22:07, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Twitter and people on it is not a reliable source. United States Man (talk) 22:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey. I would like to apologize for accidentally removing the Fultondale tornado separate article discussion. I was adding a comment about support to the discussion and fixing a typo I made doing and accidentally removed the discussion. I panicked because I Dias trying to find it back. Again I am sorry about doing that. IBlazeCat (talk) 22:38, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey! I noticed that you reverted this edit at Tornadoes of 2021. The reason I made that is because the article is not strictly for the United States. I was trying to make it a more world-wide subject. But I understand what you are trying to say; and that revision was not particularly the most constructive edits I could have made, so I have left it. Wxman28 (talk) 20:16, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

We don’t count international tornadoes in the monthly totals, so it’s best to leave things as is! After all, they’ve been working fine for 15 years. Thanks... United States Man (talk) 21:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@WXman28: Aside from it being the status quo, most countries don't seem to maintain detailed tornado records, or at least ones that are easily publicly accessible. So it would probably be misleading to try to keep up a global total. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I just saw your oppose on the requested move for the disambiguation pages and wanted to explain my thoughts on them. I personally see no reason why they should be limited to just tropical cyclone names when we have weather systems being named by various agencies. These include FU Berlin who name virtually every high and low and are supported in doing so by the German Weather Service and variousothers, the UKMO, Met Erriean, Meteo France, AEMET as well as various other european met services when an orange or a red warning is likely to be issued. We also of course have the TWC Names. That is why we feel that if the disambiguation pages are to stay, they should be expanded to include all uses of the name. There is currently a discussion ongoing about it on the WPTC talk page. Jason Rees (talk) 03:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Grand Slam (NASCAR)

added links pointing to Winston 500, Michael McDowell, David Pearson and Ryan Newman

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you for adding March into the main tornado page and into the tornado list! I wanted to apologize for criticizing you when you did that last month. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 19:43, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 46

Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
• Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
• ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
• Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
• Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
• The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
• Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
• Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
• Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
• Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.

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 a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Please accept this invitation to join WikiProject Weather's Non-tropical storms task force (WPNTS), a task force dedicated to improving all articles associated with extratropical cyclones on Wikipedia. WPNTS hosts a number of Wikipedia's highly-viewed articles, and needs your help for the upcoming winter season (for whichever hemisphere happens to be in its climatological winter). Simply and add your name to the list to accept!

HurricaneCovid _(contribs) 18:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

HurricaneCovid _(contribs) 15:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Greetings! As you, I'm a fellow contributor to Wikipedia, and I'm also keen on revising and correcting articles related to weather events, specially tornado outbreaks. As I have edited and many times re-read the 1974 Super Outbreak article, one of the most fascinating and devastating tornado events in US history, I have noticed your changes to the article, like your great reformatting of the article and tornado table to current standards, and additions of new information that makes the article more complete. However, your numerous changes from last week up to this point (March 10, 2021), which included re-organizing the tornadoes that occurred during April 3-4, 1974, in order in which they occurred chronologically, and editing the whole tornado table, to match the current format, followed for example in the 2011 Super Outbreak article, have left me with a few questions. In the image of the map from Ted Fujita, which shows the 148 tornadoes that occurred in the outbreak, all with little numbers that I can only assume are the order in which they all occurred, with number 1 being in Illinois, and 148 in North Carolina, do not truly match with the new tornado table you published, which makes a tornado in NC be the first tornado generated (at 1 pm on April 3), and a tornado in Alabama be the last that occurred, on April 4. However, it might as well be that the numbers above the tornado tracks are the order in which they were surveyed; Im not truly sure.

Second, in the days in which they were placed, because of their starting hour, tornadoes that occurred after midnight on April 3, which would technically mean they occurred on April 4, are still listed as being part of the April 3 part of the outbreak. Does this happen because all hours until 6 am are still counted as part of the previous day? Or does it have something to do with time zones, or UTC regulations?

I am amazed by how much has this article, and many other in which you have worked, have been improved and made incredibly useful and fascinating to read. Keep up the awesome work! I hope you may read this at some point. Sorry in advance for making you lose your time.

Cheers! (PS do you know how to create an article for my user, that all other users that have written in your user talk have? I would love to :) )

00:00, March 11, 2021 (UTC).

@Mjeims: The map is not ordered by time. The storm data which is available from NCDC has this clearly listed as the 3rd. There were also tornadoes in N GA and SE TN a few hours after, so thunderstorms were apparently there by that time. I initially though it may have been an error, as the tornado in the county next to it occurred about 24 hours later on the 4th, but we have to go with what the official source states.

I also moved numerous tornadoes from the 3rd to the 4th because time should be split at midnight. Additionally, if you want to create your userpage, just click the redlink that appears now and put anything you want there. Remember to sign messages on talk pages using ~~~~. United States Man (talk) 20:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

We normally use "US" in abbreviating highway designations over "U.S.", and we wouldn't switch an article from the former to the latter as you did at Interstate 840 (Tennessee). Almost all state DOTs use the former format, with or without a hyphen instead of a space between the "US" and the number", and so we've standardized on that format. The {{jct}} template and WP:USSH do not use periods, so by inserting them in the body text, you've introduced inconsistency. Imzadi 1979 → 01:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Imzadi1979: I did not realize that was uniform. That is sad, because to me U.S. is the more proper and superior way to express that. United States Man (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

		The Tornado Barnstar
		For your hard work on tornado articles, especially the one covering the outbreak last week (3/16-18/21) Zonafan39 (talk) 00:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey United States Man. I started Draft:Tornado outbreak of March 25, 2021 and thought you might be interested in it. Elijahandskip (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Where did you find the rating for the Newnan, Georgia tornado? I can't find it.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 20:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh wait. Never mind. I saw your last edit. LOL!ChessEric (talk · contribs) 20:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Stuff usually shows up on DAT before anywhere. United States Man (talk) 20:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I am now very confused. I agree with your edit reverting my edit on Tornadoes of 2021, but in the edit summary you put "pending edit". How was my edit a pending change edit when I should have permission to bypass that since I am logged in and have over 3,000 edits. Did you type that or was that really a pending edit? Elijahandskip (talk) 12:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

It was pending. Not sure why. It happens to ChessEric and myself sometimes too; although I can go back and accept my own edits it they don’t automatically accept. United States Man (talk) 15:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Can you help me complete the long-tracked EF3 Alabama tornado section using the BMX report and the DAT? I can't right now, but I don't want the section left the way it is right now.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:14, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I can work on some of it. United States Man (talk) 02:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For repeatedly talking to me and calling me out when I go too far. Thanks for your patience with me. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 00:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Law & Order (franchise), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages George Huang and Benjamin Stone.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Concerning future articles on tornado outbreaks: I am interested in clarifying just how outbreak sequences are defined. To your knowledge, what is the correct definition of an outbreak sequence, both pre- and post-1950? Thank you for your time and consideration. Most respectfully, CapeVerdeWave (talk) 17:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

A sequence is defined as several days in a row of enhanced tornado activity, usually involving more than one weather system. United States Man (talk) 17:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Regarding sequences, would you consider this event to be an outbreak or a sequence? How close together must each outbreak day or cluster be? How many tornadoes within a certain period of time? CapeVerdeWave (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

The relatively short period of time during which this outbreak occurred would not qualify it as a sequence. Usually, sequences are comprised of at least 4 or 5 days of nearly continuous activity with numerous peaks and no days without activity. The sequence this year from March 24 to 28 is really a marginal case and I wouldn't say a classic case, because of very limited activity on the 24th and 26th. However, it still meets the general criteria. One criteria which isn't required but generally understood is that a sequence features multiple "high-number" outbreak days in quick succession as a result of two or even three mid-latitude systems, meaning the whole outbreak didn't come from one storm system. The case with Palm Sunday 1965 is that this specific outbreak was produced by one weather system over a span of less than 48 hours; thus it would not qualify as a sequence. This paper would indicate that the whole week leading up to that Sunday was indeed part of a larger outbreak sequence, but the period of April 10-12 specifically would not qualify as one. United States Man (talk) 18:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. As an aside, when using NCEI's Storm Events Database, how may I determine which segment(s) belongs to a single tornado rather than two or more distinct events? For example, is there a signifier to indicate whether a county- or state-specific segment belongs to a particular tornado, particularly if two or more tornadoes of the same strength affected the same areas(s)? How would one know which tornado a segment belongs to? CapeVerdeWave (talk) 07:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The old data in that database is many times hopelessly confused, so what I would do is try to find a published map of the outbreak (assuming it is a significant one). You can try to use the coordinates and the map provided in each entry to determine, but I have found those to be slightly inaccurate as recent as 10-15 years ago. United States Man (talk) 13:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Was there something wrong with the way I formatted and made changes the tornado sections of the 2011 Super Outbreak? Almost ALL my edits were changed or reverted.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm just wondering by the way. I'm not accusing you of anything; I just want to understand so I know for the future.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

There wasn't anything wrong in the first place. Those sections don't have to be all formatted the exact same (it's bad writing). The path length can be toward the beginning occasionally, and repeatedly saying "violent EF4" for every tornado gets old. A EF4 is understood to be violent, so it is unnecessary to say it over and over. I didn't write all those myself, so don't get the impression I'm trying to protect my version. Some variation in the format of those sections is good, and the reader likely would appreciate not reading the same "This long-tracked, violent, multiple-vortex EF4 tornado touched down here at this time." line every time they read a section. Also, I noticed you changed "7" to "seven", which is normally good, but per MoS, it should read "7 homes were destroyed, 26 sustained major damage, and 35 sustained minor damage" and not "seven homes were destroyed, 26 sustained major damage, and 35 sustained minor damage". United States Man (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah! I gotcha! Thanks for letting me know!ChessEric (talk · contribs) 16:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:

• The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
• Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
• Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
• Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
• Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
• Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
• Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.
• Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.

Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 47

We linked the original discussion here back in August and had a redux here. The goal is to put every weather project under one roof to share resources on overlaping topics. Noah^Talk 02:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I notice you rammed that through with zero input from anyone who is actually active in WP:SEVERE. You need to gain support of more than just the "non-tropical squad". United States Man (talk) 02:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

We gave everyone a fair opportunity to participate in these discussions before implementing mergers. We invited every affected wikiproject to a discussion back in August. It isn't our fault that you didn't see this discussion. We had a secondary discussion at WPTC this year before anything serious occurred. It doesn't matter if the consensus was a group of nine-year-olds or people entirely outside meteorology who have no clue what is going on at all. It certainly doesn't matter that the consensus came from primarily WPTC and Non-Tropical folks. Choosing to ignore a consensus solely on the grounds of its composition is wrong. The whole goal of this is to unite every single weather project into one larger project, similar to Mil History or the roads/highways project. We need to share our limited resources, which is much easier to do under one roof. As you saw, very little changed other than page moves and a rename. If you don't like the renaming, it can be discussed to choose a better one. Simply reverting every change I made by basing your reasoning on "zero discussion" (when clearly there was) is disruptive. This whole merger was simply to organize our resources and give everyone access to things like more reviewers and a standardized quality structure. Noah^Talk 02:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Adding on, note that the WikiProjects will continue functioning the same, just as task forces. ~ 🌀HurricaneCovid🌀 12:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi United States Man,
Thanks for all your edits on NASCAR Wikipedia articles. I noticed the edits that you made earlier today when it was announced that the Xfinity Series fall race at Texas would have a new title sponsor this year, and you didn't change the name of the article an instead noted the new title sponsor in the intro. I'm guessing you did that because you don't know how to change the title of an article, so let me explain: At the top of your screen, click the "move" button and then change the title of the article and if you want to explain why you changed the title, do so in the text box. That's all you need to do- it's pretty easy. Hope this helps!

Thanks,
Cavanaughs (talk) 21:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cavanaughs and United States Man: Please also remember to follow Wikipedia's naming conventions at all times, especially the section on COMMONNAMEs. :] GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 22:48, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cavanaughs and GhostOfDanGurney: Respectfully, I have been editing here 10 years and have changed page names hundreds of times. I am well aware of how to do it. I simply did not do it this time because honestly I did not feel like doing it and figured someone else would do it shortly. Thanks though, United States Man (talk) 23:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Had you edited properly, I wouldn't've had to revert to avoid the edit conflict... But hey ho, nothing worth losing sleep over... Craig(talk) 18:41, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Cs-wolves: Properly? Explain to me how I edited improperly by adding correct information to an article. If you don't like getting edit conflicted then edit faster. I saw you did the same thing on the same page to someone else yesterday. Behavior like that may be worth a trip to ANI. United States Man (talk) 18:45, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Complete edits are better than speedy edits. What a shitty thing to say, "edit faster".... and you're threatening to go to ANI? GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 22:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Please don't harass my talk page because I reverted an edit in which you deleted relevant sourced information. Thank you. United States Man (talk) 22:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not the one you reverted. Pay attention. Thank you. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 22:38, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

You better pay attention: [1] United States Man (talk) 22:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:

• The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
• Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
• Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
• Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
• Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
• BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.

In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your welcoming message 8 years ago. I read it today.

I will refer to the instructions in your links if I write something.

Gvros8 (talk) 22:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello again. May I ask a question? At the article Shia Islam in Egypt I found some deliberate falsehoods. I removed them. Using the Article History tab I traced this misinformation to 1 July. It's pretty close to the top of that page, the 5th and 6th versions. 193.188.113.121 is the culprit. What is Wikipedia's justice system for resolving the conflict between 'anyone can edit' and 'some people are malicious'? Thank you. Gvros8 (talk) 20:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

If bad behavior is repeatedly occurring, warnings are issued for disruptive editing which eventually lead to blocks. If the user doesn’t edit the page again it is best to just let it go at this time. United States Man (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey. I know we have crossed paths every now and then with weather articles, so I wanted to invite you to a new WikiProject, the WikiProject of the Twenty-Tens decade. It was proposed near the end of May, but it was officially created today. Not sure if you would be interested, but I thought I would drop you an invite and say hi. Elijahandskip (talk) 02:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I've noticed a few times, recently, that you've added tornadoes to the monthly lists without providing a reference. I've added the references to them, but, in the future, please cite those additions. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Don't even come at me with that. You know good and well that I only add tornadoes that have actually occurred. I don't always have time to add references, and at that time there was nothing but Twitter. I don't appreciate you trying to coach me like the new help around here. I've been doing it longer than anyone at this point. United States Man (talk) 04:15, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Don't take it personally. I am not talking down to you. Even the most experienced editors get pointers or reminders now and again. Yes, I know you well enough to know that you wouldn't add a tornado without NWS confirmation. Before I check the edit history, I don't know who added which tornadoes. But, regardless of who adds them, nothing should be on that list without a reference. Even Twitter, if it's from an official NWS account. The rule I apply to myself: if I don't have time to add a source, then I don't have time to make the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TornadoLGS (talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 48 LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 19:50, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Please stop changing the lengths of I-40. The table and the overall length correctly reflect the current FHWA source from 2018 as updated in 2019. It appears you're trying to restore information from the 2002 edition of that source, which is quite out of date; it isn't even available anymore except through the Wayback Machine as the old URL redirects to the current edition. Imzadi 1979 → 20:12, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Imzadi1979: Well you need to change the lengths on the articles so they match that page. As it stands the current lengths are different depending on what article you are on. United States Man (talk) 21:59, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

The bass field/soso tornado was rain wrapped for sure and pecos hank even got it on his video for tornadoes of 2020 which you probably watch but idk. Either way the tornado was rain wrapped end of story Colin777724 (talk) 17:45, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:

1. The Rambling Man (submissions) with 5072 points
2. Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 3276 points
3. Amakuru (submissions) with 3197 points
4. Epicgenius (submissions) with 1611 points
5. Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1571 points
6. BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 1420 points
7. Hog Farm (submissions) with 1043 points
8. Bloom6132 (submissions) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
• Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of NASCAR race wins by Hendrick Motorsports, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Byron.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi, United States Man. May I ask where you got 11 tornadoes from? The source only lists 9 tornadoes (five of which were in Suffolk County NY). Thanks, Destroyeraa (Alternate account) 20:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC) @Destroyeraa: There are two tornadoes in Rhode Island. New York City is not the only NWS office. If you need to count them yourself the monthly list has 11 tornadoes. United States Man (talk) 06:40, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

You know where I can put that section in?ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Most likely nowhere on Wikipedia that I'm familiar with. The talk page is for official discussion on content. United States Man (talk) 23:12, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

I had done that before although not to that extent. Thanks. Man, that outbreak came out of nowhere. Thanks for contributing to the page. You okay by the way? I know some places in Tennessee got hit.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes I'm okay. I'm on here, right? ;) United States Man (talk) 00:01, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

True. LOL!ChessEric (talk · contribs) 01:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello United States Man. You have created a lot of weather articles on Wikipedia, so I wanted to ask if you could help with the Draft:Wikipedia:Notability (weather), which I was requested to make for the AfC reviewers. It won't be ready for a while obviously, but if you know some notability tips, feel free to add them. Once the draft feels detailed enough, it will be moved to mainspace as an essay, followed by a WP Weather/AfC discussion and vote to make it official WP:Notability subject-specific guidelines. Elijahandskip (talk) 06:50, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

During the RfC, you said tornado section of the notability guidelines are incorrect. Would you be willing to fix them to make them correct? Thanks in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:34, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I wanted to ask that you not remove in lines placed by section titles as you did in in this edit. The in lines added to the Tornado outbreak of December 10–11, 2021 article are needed as a list article, the Weather of 2021, links directly to some notable subsections. If a subsection title is changed, the link is broken, so the in-line just tells editors to also fix the link on the list article if the title is altered. Have a good day editing and thank you for your work on the outbreak article! Elijahandskip (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		This is for your work on the Tornado outbreak of December 10–11, 2021 article! Thank you for your contributions! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:27, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@Skarmory: Thank you!! United States Man (talk) 13:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

After discussing with some people off-wiki, I decided to take the initiative to start Portal:Tornadoes. I would appreciate help with the anniversaries if you are able to (no rush on them). I am still working to get everything else finished. Noah^Talk 02:53, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

@Hurricane Noah: I added one for December 25. Not too sure about the format yet. United States Man (talk) 03:37, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought we could use a format similar to the one at the TC portal. I will try to get all the selected picture spots filled up as soon as I can. Noah^Talk 03:40, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello United States Man! WikiProject Weather is doing a drive during 2022 to get all new 2022 weather articles to at least C class, with the hope of B Class. I thought you might be interested in the WP Weather drive, so I wanted to drop a message about it. Elijahandskip (talk) 14:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2020 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 Hurricane Noah -- Hurricane Noah (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving 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. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving 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. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

The article Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2020 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2020 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricane Noah -- Hurricane Noah (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hey there USM. I saw you add some tags to the yearly global weather articles. I was wondering if you could add some insight to what you'd expect in such an article, and how to make it better? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

They need references and more expanse lead sections. That's why I added the tags. United States Man (talk) 02:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

What type of stuff do you think should be in the lead? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Like Weather of 2021 Hink. It isn't too hard to write a lead ;) United States Man (talk) 02:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

There isn't a template for this, but I am very disappointed in you for directly saying "Then remove it from the other table". I am not supposed to be the clean-up crew for you, but it appears I am. It isn't hard to alter a few numbers by 1 to keep the timeline and table accurate. But apparently, you can't do basic subtraction... Elijahandskip (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Please WP:AGF. I just removed something in which myself and another editor agree shouldn’t be there. I don’t appreciate being yelled at in an immature manner. United States Man (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I would recommend retracting that statement, which is a direct personal attack toward me. I directly said in the edit summary "This is not a revert of dissagreement", and now you call it "being yelled at in an immature manner" after refusing to alter the numbers yourself. I would recommend retracting that part of the statement. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

You literally just came to my page and said “ I am not supposed to be the clean-up crew for you, but it appears I am. It isn't hard to alter a few numbers by 1 to keep the timeline and table accurate. But apparently, you can't do basic subtraction... ”.

It’s not my job to edit what you want me to. If you want it a certain way, you need to do it yourself. Your behavior as of late is very offputting. United States Man (talk) 17:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It is your job, however, to keep Wikipedia accurate. In the future, please do not vandalize make the article by making it inaccurate. The problem has been fixed, so you do not need to worry. Thank you for your contribution to the article and to Wikipedia. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

False accusations of vandalism are worthy of AN/I. United States Man (talk) 18:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Let us both just back away and calm down. We both made mistakes and we are debating on a pointless issue. Issue on the article is fixed, so I see no reason to kick this can around anymore. Have a good day. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:21, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

P.S. Wow, I ask to drop the debate and you go and keep it going on another users talk page. Sad Elijahandskip (talk) 18:24, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I saw you reverted my edit on Iowa tornado outbreak of July 2018 for being unsourced. I totally understand that – I probably should've marked this in the edit summary, but I'm using the TV show as a primary source for this. I would cite IMDb, but that's not reliable; should I do that anyway, so it at least has a source showing that it exists? (I read through Wikipedia:Citing IMDb before this, and no citation was the conclusion I came to.) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

That’s a tough situation. I would be fine with having it there if it had the tag. It would be nice if another source could be found somewhere. United States Man (talk) 02:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

I have finally, after many months of putting it aside, completed the reformatting job in the March 2-3, 2012 outbreak article yesterday. However, the columns "Damage" and "Width" are still missing a lot of information, as they were nonexistent in the previous format. I have encouraged other editors to help me find said information. I ask you directly to your talk page, as I know your record on meteorology articles. A citation extension may needed at the end of the tables, which should contain all citations for the NWS offices involved with the outbreak. However, as my edit history mostly consists of minor to major grammar corrections and extensions, I do not know how to properly cite. If you could help me with this, it would be of great help. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thank you for your time! Mjeims (talk) 06:44, 23 February (UTC)

Thank you for doing that! I'll have to go back through and do a full NCDC revision to clean up any errors that may have been there previously and to add damage and refs. United States Man (talk) 17:54, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes! As I used the tornado table template from the code coming from the 2011 Super Outbreak, I forgot to erase the data related to 2011 from the code, like the damage prefix to 2011 USD dollars, and the name of the event for the March 3 section of the table. You already appear to have found said errors, as I saw on the pages' history. Thank you inmensely for helping me find the necessary references and missing data. Hopefully, with this changes, you'll be able to maybe even nominate the article in the future, as what it was holding it down was it's format. Mjeims (talk) 02:13, 24 February (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 SRX Series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ryan Newman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
• AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
• Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
• GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
• Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
• SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
• Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. 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 Needed.

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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
• AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
• Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
• GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
• Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
• SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
• Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.

These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. 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 Needed.

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. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2021 Tennessee floods 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 Steelkamp -- Steelkamp (talk) 06:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

list of nascar race wins by David Pearson 2600:1702:2EB1:2C20:4075:57A2:D7E9:5225 (talk) 00:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

		The Weather Barnstar
		Thank you for your continuous and endless work on improving weather articles! Elijahandskip (talk) 02:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of United States tornadoes from January to March 2022, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evergreen, Alabama.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Given you were a part of the color scheme discussion, I would like if you added your opinion since they were unfortunately changed. The discussion is here. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 17:00, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thanks for reverting my edits with adequate explanation. I honestly derailed on the train tracks, but you were there to help revert it. Thank you. Severestorm28 23:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll say this here in case you didn't see my ping: When are you going to address the remaining points of the good article review for 2021 Tennessee floods? Steelkamp (talk) 03:21, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I apologize. I will try to get to that soon. United States Man (talk) 14:33, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I will give you seven days from now, or else I will fail the review. Steelkamp (talk) 04:54, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

List of United States tornadoes from October to November 2021

added a link pointing to Bremen, Illinois

XPEL 225

added a link pointing to Zane Smith

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

I know that you're aware of this case, but do you have any interest in at least giving a brief statement in regard to that? MarioJump83! 14:53, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 13, 2022, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Storms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 08:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The article 2021 Tennessee floods you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2021 Tennessee floods for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Steelkamp -- Steelkamp (talk) 04:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for making tornado articles pristine! Wikiwillz (talk) 03:01, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Can you tell me what "enhance the table" means? ChessEric (talk · contribs) 19:33, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	This is for dealing with me and my nonsense since I started editing on Wikipedia. I always feel like I'm bothering/annoying you. XD. Also, thank you for helping me deal with the ArbCom situation today. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 03:39, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Turkish War of Independence on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey United States Man. I am trying not to be unproductive, but all I would ask is you add citations from the NWS when tornadoes are rated. That is the only reason I was removing them, because the current citations do not say they are 'EF1'. I do thank you for your work on the article. Elijahandskip (talk) 02:55, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

If you are thankful you wouldn't try to work against me at every turn. I spend more time redoing things than I do anything else. United States Man (talk) 02:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Again, just add a citation for the EF1 ratings and everything is good. As it stands now, those EF1 ratings have no citations, meaning WP:OR. I know it isn't OR, but still, I hope you see where I am coming from. Elijahandskip (talk) 03:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Where was this agreement for removing Allendale at Tornado outbreak of April 4–7, 2022? I went and looked and all I can see is the Ulmer tornado being discussed removed because the Allendale was as well (which I should note was removed initially by only one user). It had some significance to it as well. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 21:01, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Cyclonebiskit removed it because of the minimal overall impact and small section size. Everyone agreed so it wasn’t readded. Please gain support at the talk page before reverting, as you have been warned numerous times about it. Thank you. United States Man (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Mind you that I was the one who made the section and had no problem with it being removed. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

I just want to let you know that the user who is putting in the tornado watch image into the 2022 tornado page also did it for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 pages. I have removed them all as I find them unhelpful for the articles as all they're doing is taking up space and because tornado watches don't tell the story of the tornado events for the year. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: The user who I mentioned above was determined to be a sock of a banned user and that account was also banned. LOL! ChessEric (talk · contribs) 17:13, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I saw that :P. United States Man (talk) 17:38, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

How do I nominate an article to be an A rank or GA?ChessEric (talk · contribs) 04:15, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

WP:GAN and WP:GAI United States Man (talk) 04:24, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of United States tornadoes in April 2022, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of political parties in Italy on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Just want to acknowledge all the work you've been putting into the 2011 lists lately. I know it's a ton of work to get all of those properly formatted and written. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 15:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! April is almost done, and I'm moving on to May next. :) United States Man (talk) 15:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I believe there was a misunderstanding with my last edit to the Andover, KS EF3 tornado earlier today. An EF3 rated tornado with wind speeds up to 155 mph is considered the starting point of high-end EF3 intensity to many people including myself. The Taylorville, IL EF3 from December 1st, 2018 was given a rating of EF3 with wind speeds up to 155 mph, and the national weather service in Lincoln, IL considered this high-end EF3 intensity ~ even says it on the damage assessment toolkit (DAT). For what you said about mid-range EF3 intensity, that's usually considered. 146-154 mph if you were curious. This message was sent in a way to ask if I could undo this edit? Thank you ~ let me know if you have any questions. 🙂 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholas Krasznavolgyi (talk • contribs) 01:36, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

1. Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
2. AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
3. Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
4. Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
5. Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.
6. Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
7. Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.

The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of 2021 Tennessee floods 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --evrik ^(talk) 00:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

NASCAR doesn't make any reference to rounds in its lexicon. It refers to the race by name. Please use race instead of round in the table you reverted. Deanrah (talk) 23:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

An arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• MarioProtIV (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from closing, or reopening, any discussion outside their own user talk space. This restriction may be appealed after 12 months.
• Chlod (talk · contribs) is warned about using off-wiki platforms in an attempt to win on-wiki disputes.
• Elijahandskip (talk · contribs) is warned about using off-wiki platforms in an attempt to win on-wiki disputes.
• LightandDark2000 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from pages about weather, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• MarioProtIV is indefinitely topic banned from pages about weather, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• A set of best practices for leaders and/or moderators of off-wiki chat platforms to consider adopting

For the Arbitration Committee, --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 14:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Cyclones closed

From what I saw when I first got on, I thought we were moving away from bolding the ratings in the tornado table. However, I've noticed you bolding ratings in other articles like the List of tornadoes in the tornado outbreak sequence of May 21–26, 2011, Tornado outbreak of March 2–3, 2020, and List of tornadoes in the 2011 Super Outbreak. (I had actually removed all of the bolded rating from the tables before it was reinserted back in) I'm not going to criticize as I respect you too much to do so (as I've said before, I feel like I'm just annoying you all the time), but I just wanted some clarification on why you are doing this. Thanks. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 00:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Turning Point USA on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)