User talk:Rcsprinter123/Archives/19
Invitation to WikiProject Brands
 You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics. |
|---|
Adopt
Sorry for taking such a long time before I came back there. I totally had forgotten about my adoption. I have replied there now TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- And so have I. Rcsprinter (gas) No, I'm Santa Claus! @ 17:29, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
Well, I'm not as festive (or template-gifted) as some of my fellow Wikipedians, but I still wanted to wish you a great holiday season (whatever you may choose to celebrate) and a Happy New Year. Go Phightins! 02:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 December 2012
- News and notes: Debates on Meta sparking along—grants, new entities, and conflicts of interest
As part of its new focus on core responsibilities, the Wikimedia Foundation is reforming its grant schemes so that they are more accessible to individual volunteers. The community is invited to look at proposals for a new scheme—for now called Individual engagement grants (IEGs)—which is due to kick off on January 15. On Meta, the community is once again debating the two new offline participation models—user groups (open membership groups designed to be easy to form) and thematic organizations (incorporated non-profits representing the Wikimedia movement and supporting work on a specific theme within or across countries). In a consultation process on Meta that will last until January 15, the community will be discussing WMF proposals for a new guideline on conflicts of interests concerning Wikimedia resources. The draft covers COI issues for both volunteers and organizations across the movement.
- WikiProject report: A Song of Ice and Fire
This week, we spent some time with WikiProject A Song of Ice and Fire, which focuses on the eponymous series of high fantasy literature, the television series Game of Thrones, and related works by George R. R. Martin. The project was started in July 2006 and has grown to include 11 Good Articles maintained by a small yet enthusiastic band of editors.
- Featured content: Battlecruiser operational
Seven articles and two lists were promoted to 'featured' status this week, including List of battlecruisers. The article covers all of the battlecruisers—which were a type of warship similar in size to a battleship but with several defining characteristics—ever planned or constructed. The last British battlecruiser built, HMS Hood, is pictured at right.
- Technology report: Efforts to "normalise" Toolserver relations stepped up
Efforts were stepped up this week to sow a feeling of trust between the major parties with an interest in the future of the Toolserver. The tool- and bot-hosting server – more accurately servers – are currently operated by German chapter, Wikimedia Germany, with assistance from the Foundation and numerous volunteers, including long-time system administrator Daniel Baur (more commonly known by his pseudonym DaB). However, those parties have more recently failed to see eye-to-eye on the trajectory for the Toolserver, which is scheduled to be replaced by Wikimedia Labs in late 2013, with increasing concern about the tone of discussions.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low 
to High 
, while for quality the scale goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Adopt exam
Sorry for being exceptionally late as usual. I have answered all the questions. Please put up the next topic for the exam. [P.S. How many chapters are still left before the final exam?TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- There are four, but now I have marked your test and before the next lesson there is a little something else. Btw, as I seem to have to keep reminding you about this (no problem lol), I wondered if you knew about watching pages which you want to keep an eye on. That way, whenever there's a change, like a new lesson, you can respond right away. Rcsprinter (shout) @ 21:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello Rcsprinter, How are you? Just wondered if you are going to be involved in any way with the GA process for the Slug article? Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 15:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Don't think so actually, staying out of it. Worked on it beforehand. Rcsprinter (converse) No, I'm Santa Claus! @ 10:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
- Slugs are beginning to gain national prominence as the entire country dissolves into a soaking rotten morass. They were the subject of a lead article in the Times yesterday, as well as comprehensive coverage on pages 16 and 17. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
WikiCup 2013 starting soon
Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!
Hello Rcsprinter123, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 18:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
GOCE 2012 Annual Report
Guild of Copy Editors 2012 Annual Report
 The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
|
Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup
Hello, Rcsprinter123, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
- The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
- Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
- If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
- Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
- Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.
Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 12:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Requesting adoption
Hi Rcsprinter, I would like to be your disciple, although I have a few conditions which I feel is necessary to let you know should you want to adopt me. Thanks a lot! Cheers, Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 08:04, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Rcsprinter123, thanks for your willingness to adopt me. Well, here are the conditions I was talking about earrlier:
1. I am still studying. My next few years should be very busy, as 2013 there's a national exam and 2014 onwards I am going to secondary school, which will be really busy. So, I may not be able to log on everyday, or sometimes, even for weeks. I hope you can bear with me for any late replies.
2. When I log on, it is usually at night (about 9pm-12am Singapore time [UTC+8] , which is about 1pm-4pm UK time). Sometimes, I may be able to log on in the day (SG time), no specific time. This may change, but this is the current usual log on time. Anyway, I will update the Qui template on my talk page and user page when I am online. :) Cheers, Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 13:10, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- That's all fine; I suppose it's great that you're studying but also that you have joined wikipedia. I will set up your adoption centre some time this week, it consists of a series of lessons and tests with a final exam. I'll give you the link when it's ready. Cheers! Rcsprinter (message) @ 12:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I have other hobbies/interests as well. Just treating editing Wikipedia as any other hobby. Of course, I try to contribute whenever I can. 
Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 14:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 31 December 2012
- From the editor: Wikipedia, our Colosseum
In the impersonal, detached Colosseum that is Wikipedia, people find it much easier to put their thumbs down. As such, many people active in the Wikimedia movement have witnessed a precipitous decline in civil discourse. This is far from a new trend, yet many people would agree that it all seemed somehow worse in 2012.
- In the media: Is the Wikimedia movement too 'cash rich'?
A recent, poorly researched and poorly written story in the Register highlighted the perceived "cash rich" status of the Wikimedia movement. ... The Telegraph and Daily Dot, among others, have alleged that there are multiple links between the WMF, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, and Kazakhstan's government, which is, for all intents and purposes, a one-party non-democratic state.
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation fundraiser a success; Czech parliament releases photographs to chapter
On 27 December the Wikimedia Foundation announced the conclusion of their ninth annual fundraiser, which attracted more than 1.2 million donors. The appeal reached its goal of US$25 million, even though fundraising banners ran for only nine days.
- Technology report: Looking back on a year of incremental changes
In the first of two features, the Signpost this week looks back on 2012, a year when developers finally made inroads into three issues that had been put off for far too long (the need for editors to learn wiki-markup, the lack of a proper template language and the centralisation of data) but left all three projects far from finished.
- Discussion report: Image policy and guidelines; resysopping policy
Current discussions on the English Wikipedia include ...
- Interview: Interview with Brion Vibber, the WMF's first employee
Brion Vibber has been a Wikipedia editor for nearly 11 years and was the first person officially hired to work for the Wikimedia Foundation. He was instrumental in early development of the MediaWiki software and is now the lead software architect for the foundation's mobile development team.
- Featured content: Whoa Nelly! Featured content in review
At the beginning of the year, we began a series of interviews with editors who have worked hard to combat systemic bias through the creation of featured content; although we haven't seen six installments yet, we've also had some delightful interviews with people who write articles on some of our most core topics. Now, as we close the year, I would like to present some of my own musings on the state of featured content—especially as it pertains to systemic bias and core topics.
- WikiProject report: New Year, New York
This week, we're celebrating the New Year from Times Square by interviewing WikiProject New York City. Since December 2004, WikiProject NYC has had the difficult task of maintaining articles about the largest city in the United States, many of which are also among the the most viewed articles on Wikipedia. The project is home to 22 Featured Articles, 7 Featured Lists, 32 pieces of Featured Media, and a lengthy list of Did You Know? entries.
- Recent research: Wikipedia and Sandy Hook; SOPA blackout reexamined
Northeastern University researcher Brian Keegan analyzed the gathering of hundreds of Wikipedians to cover the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy. ... A First Monday article reviews several aspects of the Wikipedia participation in the 18 January 2012, protests against SOPA and PIPA legislation in the USA. The paper focuses on the question of legitimacy, looking at how the Wikipedia community arrived at the decision to participate in those protests.
Boris Johnson GAN
Hi, I reviewed you GA nomination of Boris Johnson a while back, but forgot to alert you about it. Unfortunately I failed the article because I felt it has too many issues to pass at GA the moment, but another user has made a few general suggestions on improvements that could be made. You might like to take a look and perhaps make a few updates. I'd also recommend submitting the article both for a peer review where it can receive an in-depth review, and also a copy edit. I'm happy to put it forward for both processes, and to work on some of the suggestions as I'm quite interested in British Politics and feel this should be at least at GA standard. Let me know what your thoughts are on this. Cheers. Paul MacDermott (talk) 17:00, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
- Right yes, I'm happy to let others do some work to it before it gets nominated for anything. Go ahead. Rcsprinter (whisper) @ 10:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- No worries. I'll start with a peer review. Cheers Paul MacDermott (talk) 15:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- The peer review is now open so I'll keep an eye on it. I like your bouncing Wikipedia ball btw. How did you get it to do that? Paul MacDermott (talk) 16:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- No worries. I'll start with a peer review. Cheers Paul MacDermott (talk) 15:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Adoption
Can you "adopt" me? Hiaw777 ( Talk ) 13:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Editor of the Year
| You have been nominated for the Wikipedia 2012 Editor of the Year Award! |
by Hiaw777 ( Talk ) 15:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Nice as the thought is you've just made that up and I've nominated the idea for deletion. Rcsprinter (constabulary) @ 16:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Slug again
Helo again Rcsprinter, The editors at the Gastropod Project acknowledge the edits you have made on Slug in the past, and we are happy that you thought the article was already in good shape a few weeks ago. However, the next time you think about nominating a gastropod article for GA, especially one where you don't intend to do any work on the GA clean-up process yourself, please... before you nominate the article, put a note on the talk page of the project, asking whether the project members think the article is ready to be submitted. We would have declined on Slug, because we knew it was not ready. As it turns out there is not enough labor force available and willing to bring Slug up to the necessary standard in time. Invertzoo (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Skyfall
Hello and thanks for your eagerness in wanting to take Skyfall to the next level. However, a discussion has taken place among the main editors and it was felt that your involvement thus far was not enough for you to be able to justify nomination on this occasion. As per WP:GAN, an approach should really have been made to discuss this nomination with those editors who have put in many hours of research and writing with a view of supporting your intending nomination. You didn't, and so the template has been removed. This was purely in good faith and would welcome you to participate with a view of following the correct avenues, should you wish to nominate in the future. Happy editing! -- CassiantoTalk 17:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Articles for creation/St. Louis Cardinals Cheerleaders
My article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/St._Louis_Cardinals_Cheerleaders) was declined because you stated the article already exist but it doesn't. The link first provided to me takes me to the Arizona Cardinal Cheerleaders. This is a different group altogether. The Big Red Line was created by KMOX Robert Hyland for the Cardinals, not by the NFL Cardinals. We were not run by the NFL Cardinals organization either. The current Arizona Cardinals are part of the Cardinal organization, internally. Nowhere on their page does if even mention the Big Red Line or the history of the St Louis Cheerleaders. Please explain why my article was declined on the basis of "it already exist"? Cox6 (talk) 18:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- OK, I revoke that declining rationale; I still wouldn't let it pass because it needs Wikifying and sourcing a bit more too. I also spotted phrases like "our wonderful city" - wikipedia articles need to be neutral and impartial, so you couldn't say wonderful. "Our" indicates this is only going to be read in that ditymwhennin fact anyone in the world could look. If you keep writing and formatting it to the Manual of Style, you can request a new review by adding {{subst:submit}} to the top. Rcsprinter (chat) @ 20:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Submission on Community Loudspeakers
First of all, thank you for taking the time to review my submission. Could you please clarify the reasons for declining it? I significantly improved the referencing from the previous submission, adding more secondary sources that all demonstrated the subject's notability. Your rejection also wanted "clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia." However, I detailed how the company revolutionized its industry and influenced the works of some of the greatest musicians in rock and roll history. I'm not sure what else to do - could you please help?
SFall34 SFall34 (talk) 04:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 07 January 2013
- Op-ed: Meta, where innovative ideas die
Meta is the wiki that has coordinated a wide range of cross-project Wikimedia activities, such as the activities of stewards, the archiving of chapter reports, and WMF trustee elections. The project has long been an out-of-the-way corner for technocratic working groups, unaccountable mandarins, and in-house bureaucratic proceedings. Largely ignored by the editing communities of projects such as Wikipedia and organizations that serve them, Meta has evolved into a huge and relatively disorganized repository, where the few archivists running it also happen to be the main authors of some of its key documents. While Meta is well-designed for supporting the librarians and mandarins who stride along its corridors, visitors tend to find the site impenetrable—or so many people have argued over the past decade. This impenetrability runs counter to Meta's increasingly central role in the Wikimedia movement.
- WikiProject report: Where Are They Now? Episode IV: A New Year
The dawning of a new year offers both a fresh slate and an opportunity to revisit our previous adventures. 2012 marked the fifth anniversary of the WikiProject Report and was the column's most productive year with 52 articles published. In addition to sharing the experiences of Wikipedia's many active projects, we expanded our scope to highlight unique projects from other languages of Wikipedia, and tracked down all of the former editors-in-chief of the Signpost for an introspective interview ... While last year's "Summer Sports Series" may have drawn yawns from some readers, a special report on "Neglected Geography" elicited more comments than any previous issue of the Report. Following in the footsteps of our past three recaps, we'll spend this week looking back at the trials and tribulations of the WikiProjects we encountered in 2012. Where are they now?
- News and notes: 2012—the big year
The past 12 months have seen a multitude of issues and events in the Wikimedia foundation, the movement at large, and the English Wikipedia. The movement, now in its second decade, is growing apace in its international reach, cultural and linguistic diversity, technical development, and financial complexity; and many factors have combined to produce what has in many ways been the biggest, most dynamic year in the movement's history. Looking back at 2012, we faced a difficult task in doing justice to all of the notable events in a single article; so the Signpost has selected just a few examples from outside the anglosphere, from the English Wikipedia, and from the Wikimedia Foundation, rather than attempting to cover every detail that happened.
- Featured content: Featured content in review
Over the past year, 963 pieces of featured content were promoted. The most active of the featured content programs was featured article candidates (FAC), which promoted an average of 31 articles a month. This was followed by featured picture candidates (FPC; 28 a month). Coming in third was featured list candidates (FLC; 20 a month). Featured topic and featured portal candidates remained sluggish, each promoting fewer than 20 items over the year.
- Technology report: Looking ahead to 2013
Following on from last week's reflections on 2012, this week the Technology report looks ahead to 2013, a year that will almost certainly be dominated by the juggernauts of Wikidata, Lua and the Visual Editor.
Please comment on Talk:Cultural impact of extraterrestrial contact
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Cultural impact of extraterrestrial contact. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)