This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:

• Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
• Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
• 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
• Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. 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 equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Ryan troyer is a blatant, near-vandalism autbio by a child. Please return to the article and tag it appropriately for deletion, then please review the instructions at WP:NPP again. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:28, 15 April 2017 (UTC) BTW: I concur with John from Idegon's comments above, and FWIW, the patroller right can be removed at simple admin discretion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:32, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Kudpung; Sure, I'll go back and tag and what not. Although I'm going to refer to John's conversation above, I don't patrol often on NP, but I do elsewhere. Also, as a fellow Wikipedian, be nice, as with your second comment. I definitely think that two mistakes in a two-to-three month period isn't a major infraction. As with the possibility of my rights removal, as John didn't take any action for 'whatever its worth', I would rather you respectfully go to WP:INCIDENT if you see my right as improper, rather than just mop them away as that doesn't seem deserved (I'm not a vandal, nor a person to misuse a right intentionally). Were humans, we make mistakes. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 14:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

You are too touchy! I was merely offering a straightforward answer to: then you may start a discussion at WP:ANI per what WP:PERM has to say about rights removal. No discussion is needed to remove a minor right - minor rights are easy come, easy go; they are accorded on competency and an expressed intention to use them, they are not badges of merit or rank. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Kudpung; I was going to respond, but now I've run into a tight schedule. So I think we should just head separate ways and drop it for now until we meet one another again sometime if and when that happens. Cheers! Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 22:23, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Adog. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 08:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

No way! Nicnote • ask me a question • contributions 08:46, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia so far; they are very much appreciated. Your experience and tenure have been an asset to the project. Have you ever thought of becoming an administrator? It can be enjoyable, challenging, and a great way to help Wikipedia. To receive feedback on your chances of successfully requesting administrative privileges, consider starting a poll: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll Thank you! Are you reading this on another user's talk page? If you are experienced and trusted, and would consider becoming an admin, you are very much encouraged to take the take the poll. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello there. I was wondering if you could please address my message on the That Poppy talk page. It's been there for a few days and I notice you've been rather active there. I'm curious why we're able to list her real name on the EP page but not her own artist page, especially considering that her real name links back to the That Poppy page. Cheers, Percivl (talk) 22:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Percivl; Correlation does not imply causation, i.e., the name does not define the character or artist in question for this situation, as with another artist: Marshmello, whose identity is similarly unknown. I believe it's not appropriate to use or identify Moriah Pereira as the character That Poppy, as there is not sufficient evidence from reliable sources directly confirming that she is the artist or character portrayed, as most references provided merely mention the name. I would argue to look at WP:NPF (possibly WP:DOB, however not probably), as stated in previous discussion(s). Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 21:34, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
• 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
• Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
• Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. 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 equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

On 9 May 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Buhe (politician), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 06:53, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Few notes on the Poppy changes you are reverting back: -Her new artist name is Poppy and is reflected as such across all social networks and distribution channels (such as iTunes)
-The image being used is a wildly outdated one and is frankly hard to even find
-The latest music (out today) is released on "I'm Poppy" records via Mad Decent Records
-Please check her YouTube page for the most current channel view count
-"Lowlife" (Featuring Travis Mills) was never an officially released track, it was a demo that was leaked

Coaster500; True the artist name is That Poppy, however, that isn't a reasonable explanation as to why the sourced description of her 'identity' or creation was deleted. The content is backed by sources, and merely gives mention to the ideas behind the subject matter which seems proper at this time with no other information. The image is copyrighted, and is not within our policies (WP:IUP). The latest music video to-date is actually entitled "Computer Boy" which was published on 19 May 2017 with no indication of recording studio in the description or elsewhere (although on her channel, it lists that "Interscope Records" is of her address). The view count is correct on your part, that was my mistake for not spotting that. Finally, Lowlife is a grey-area for Travis Miller and could be discussed further, although I did find a source indicating it was released via Island Records and now it is private. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 23:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 819 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

The statistic is noteworthy, superlative and comes from a source that is verifiable and trustworthy. Leave as is; further reversions will not be tolerated, thank you Sean 2015 (talk) 02:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Sean 2015; I'm sorry, but as from what I've said, Ebyabe, and with reversions from SeminoleNation have tried to explain and convey, we need consensus from the text in question before including it in the article, and I ask you kindly to refer to Miami's talk page. Flipping a summary doesn't help anyone in this situation, especially edit warring by ignoring conversation, so please refrain. From my standpoint, the text in question seems holds WP:UNDUE weight in the article, and especially shouldn't be placed in the lead section as it doesn't summarize anything in the article but itself. Although if you wished, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline, you could instead create a section about crime and homelessness that would be applicable in a demographics section (Miami currently doesn't have one). However, just referring to one study in saying "Miami was rated as the worst U.S. city in which to live" should be represented with reliable studies or references further explaining why Miami is rated 'the worst' with statistics. For instance, sections in Chicago#Crime or New York City#Public Safety are great examples of displaying crime and homelessness as a demographic using factual information and refraining for the article to be 'overtly positive'.

Overall, yes, the information was published in a reliable source, which was from the Miami Herald (probably best summarized per WP:ASSERT for 24/7 Wall Street, but the source may need to be discussed further as I'm not fully informed about its publishing besides that it occasionally seems to produce the run of the mill listings and ratings of subjects but again, discussion). However, the way in which the information is presented, where its placed in the article, and the edit warring is why I have a problem with the content looking at it now. Mind you, the others and myself aren't trying to be jerks, we're trying to help out in sorting information properly within the article, and edit warring and being one-sided hasn't and won't work in solving disputes. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 04:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

• Additional note – WP:EDITCONSENSUS as with more options to settle and for future reference. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 04:37, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I had typed some comments and a response here and I thought I had saved it, but it is not showing for some reason. I have moved the passage in question to the Economy section where I feel it might be a better "fit". Sean 2015 (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I have responded on my talk page. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Union of Opposites ‖ 05:21, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Sean 2015; Thank you for replying and considering my view (and overall ours), although if the others and you would like, in the future we could discuss about developing the economy and demographic sections about information from both sides of sources. I've seen Ebyabe put it in chronological order which also helps :D. It looks great there thus far where it is, and if needed refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline and add further reliable sources. Other than that, if you need any help, feel free to ask. Although next time, make sure if someone reverts an edit, explain to them your side and if that doesn't work then talk it out. :) Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 05:34, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Bro, what do you mean yt isn't a reliable source? His second channel has 4.8 million subs. There's no denying that. Everybody knows it's true. Then why TF are you removing correct content??? AdiRams12 (talk) 23:43, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

AdiRams12; To sum up: please read our policies, especially WP:RSSELF and WP:BLP for further information. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 01:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I get it but I don't quite see the problem in mentioning his second channel. I mean, you've allowed the fact that he has 16 million subs on his main channel to be published. Then what's wrong with publishing his second channel subscribers?? They're both pretty much the same thing. Btw I get why you removed the "DramaAlert" thing. If his second channel is considered self published media, why isn't his main channel?? Also, thanks for responding and not ignoring:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdiRams12 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

AdiRams12; No problem and thank you for responding and asking questions. :) Mentioning the second channel is fine in the infobox, however this edit listing it under 'name' didn't seem appropriate since its his YouTube channel name not his actual name. If you would like, you could list the statistics of each channel such as those done within Joey Graceffa, Philip DeFranco, Roman Atwood, etcetera etcetera's infobox's under 'subscribers' and 'total views' (although this could be subjected to change if WikiProject YouTube, which you could also join if you wanted, creates a style guide for YouTube personalities articles).

About using his channel as a source, I would see WP:SELFPUB/WP:SELFSOURCE which can help, and I forgot to mention WP:PRIMARY. Generally, YouTube shouldn't be used as a source (as with any social media), but if needed it can and should be used with a reliable secondary source to verify the given information if needed (WP:AEIS). Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 22:13, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks for clearing that up. Have a nice day :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdiRams12 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

AdiRams12; No problem, any time, and have a good day as well! :D Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 22:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

You removed a lot from this article.

Can you please put back the part about her legacy in the first paragraph? I had sources for all of it.

Also, what you called speculation is actually just my surveying the third party sources. And again, I had sources for it.

Most important though please is for you to restore the part about her legacy and her contributions to Haitian dance that I had in the first paragraph as that explains her notability and it came sourced.

Thanks!

--Aliceba (talk) 21:51, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Aliceba, Rms125a@hotmail.com; I looked at the edit you meant but I feel that Rms will be able to explain better than I could since he was the one to fix the wording.

However, personally by looking at the edit, it seems that the wording is used wrongly in some of lines. For example, the article stated beforehand: "She has also been credited for keeping Haitian dances such as Yanvalou, Nago and Rada alive" when the Aljazeera source states "Viviane Gauthier taught her students the steps to some of Haiti's most famous folklore dances: the yanvalou, the nago, the rada... And without her dedication, some of her students believe Haitian folklore dance would effectively be dead" which seems to be a form of speculation coming from close peers opinions and not from a historical of general public point of view while also not providing a whole analysis of what the source suggests otherwise (leading thus to WP:OR in some instances) — Correct me if that analogy is wrong, I took a peek not an in depth look at the edit.

If you wish to explain further you can do so on my talk page if needed or if wanted it can be moved towards the article's talk page or his talk page. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 23:50, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

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. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

You previously commented at the page Shorty Awards.

Perhaps you'd like to see Talk:Shorty Awards for recent developments ? Sagecandor (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Sagecandor I commented in 2015, but sure I'll take a look at it after I take a test. :) Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 16:54, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, good luck, thank you ! Sagecandor (talk) 16:54, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Sagecandor; thanks for the luck. :D Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 17:00, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

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 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm not biting any newcomers, the guy is a sockpuppet if you did more research you would know. Why are you reverting my edit? A lazy river is not an "amusement ride". Hawkeye75 (talk) 08:15, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hawkeye75; I don't think Special:Contributions/82.132.224.129 is much of an SPI based on the report from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/82.132.247.20. Although fair point about the lazy river, I will revert that one, and others that are like it belonging to water ride so sorry for that slip. Mostly, I was concerned with the edit summary, because even if an amateur/experienced individual was editing on different IP's, we should still treat them as per their actions until there is an undoubted cause about their intent to edit here (citing WP:NOTHERE). I'm not trying to be rude, just wanted to touch up on my statement from my summary. :D Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 11:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I've created Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks#Water parks and water rides, any and all input appreciated. Thank you for your earlier input on the same page. 82.132.242.204 (talk) 13:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

• On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
• Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Adog104, I started this Wikipedia account a few days ago with the intentions changing and correcting Wikipedia pages about the amusement branche. I was looking at the Dutch 'Mega Coaster' Wikipage and saw that a lot of things were very, very wrong. I was looking at the English Wikipage about Mega Coasters and this one was contradictory too. Me and a other Dutch speaking Wikipedia author are on a mission correcting these pages drastically and right. I will explain the following in paragraphs numbered 1 till 4:

1. Mistakes Dutch Wikipage 2. Mistakes English Wikipage 3. The starting process 4. Exchanging information

Mistakes Dutch Wikipage

The mistakes made on the Dutch wikipage were too bad. Really. The page told us a Mega Coaster is counted in 3 groups: Mega, Hyper and Giga. What's wrong about these is that 1st Mega a model name is from Intamin AG^[1] and Mack Rides^[2], second Hyper^[3] being the model of B&M, Arrow Dynamics^[4] and Mack Rides^[5] (larger than the Mack Megacoaster) and Giga^[6] being a model from Intamin. All hypercoasters from B&M having the minimal height of a Giga aren't actually a Giga, but still a Hyper. Heights: Intamin Mega Coaster 45 meters (148ft) till 90 meters (295ft) Intamin Giga Coaster 90 meters (295ft) till 120 meters (394ft) B&M Hyper Coaster 50 meters (164ft) no max.

This are the 'approximate' heights of the models and the other companies are using these heights too. With some information from RCDB we will get to it.

Mistakes English Wikipage

The English Wikipage was to be honest a well advanced Wikipage with correct information, but with common mistakes like parting B&Ms and Arrows into Giga's while it's just a model name, where they don't belong to. Read previous paragraph for further information.

The starting process

The starting process is probably the most difficult time for a Wikipage. Common things like "Oh, I forgot about that" "I did not have enough time to involve in any of these Wikis..." etc. When we make a deal, we talk furthermore.

Exchanging information

Information can be found on RCDB, for European coasters we are available for questions, if we are able to ask about non-European coaster to you.

I hope to hear from you soon,

Kind Regards --Rc030 (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

References

--- Rc030; Thank you kindly for contacting me and sorting this in an organized way, although if you wanted a bigger outreach towards this problem I would suggest possibly posting this information to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amusement Parks. I would be glad to help and maybe sort out some problems/misunderstandings, however, I would also like to see others from our project to join in on this also if that is alright (Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Participants)! :D Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 23:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Last year, you signed up to participate in Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) 2016 on the English Wikipedia. The event was an international success, with hundreds of editors creating thousands of articles on Asian topics across dozens of different language versions of Wikipedia.

I'd like to invite you to join us for Wikipedia Asian Month 2017, which once again lasts through the month of November. The goal is for users to create new articles on Asian-related content, each at least 3,000 bytes and 300 words in length. Editors who create at least four articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard!

Also be sure to check out the Wikipedia Asian Art Month affiliate event - creating articles on Asian art topics can get you a Metropolitan Museum of Art postcard!

If you're interested, please sign up here for the English Wikipedia. If you are interested in also working on other language editions of Wikipedia, please visit the meta page to see other participating projects. If you have any questions, please visit our talk page.

Thank you!

- User:SuperHamster and User:Titodutta on behalf of The English Wikipedia WAM Team

This will be the last message you receive from the English Wikipedia WAM team for being a 2016 participant. If you sign up for WAM 2017, you will continue receiving periodic updates on the 2017 event.

The final round of the 2017 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2017 WikiCup top three finalists:

• First Place - Adityavagarwal (submissions)
• Second Place - Vanamonde (submissions)
• Third Place - Cas Liber (submissions)

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

• Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a two-way tie with themselves for an astonishing five FAs in R2 and R4).
• Good Article – Adityavagarwal had 14 GAs promoted in R5.
• Featured List – Bloom6132 (submissions) and 1989 (submissions) both produced 2 FLs in R2
• Featured Pictures – SounderBruce (submissions) improved an image to FP status in R5, the only FP this year.
• Featured Topic – MPJ-DK (submissions) has the only FT of the Cup in R3.
• Good Topic – Four different editors created a GT in R2, R3 and R4.
• Did You Know – Adityavagarwal had 22 DYKs on the main page in R5.
• In The News – MBlaze Lightning (submissions) had 14 ITN on the main page in R2.
• Good Article Review – Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (submissions) completed 31 GARs in R1.

Over the course of the 2017 WikiCup the following content was added or improved on Wikipedia: 51 Featured Articles, 292 Good Articles, 18 Featured Lists, 1 Featured Picture, 1 Featured Topics, 4 Good Topics, around 400 Did You Knows, 75 In The News, and 442 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.

Regarding the prize vouchers - @Adityavagarwal, Vanamonde93, Casliber, Bloom6132, 1989, and SounderBruce: please send Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) an email from the email address to which you would like your Amazon voucher sent. Please include your preference of global Amazon marketplace as well. We hope to have the electronic gift cards processed and sent within a week.

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2018 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. 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 · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

So the 2017 WikiCup has come to an end. Congratulations to the winner, to the other finalists and to all those who took part. 177 contestants signed up, more than usual, but not all of them submitted entries in the first round. Were editors attracted by the cash prizes offered for the first time this year, or were these irrelevant? Do the rules and scoring need changing for the 2018 WikiCup? If you have a view on these or other matters, why not join in the WikiCup discussion about next year's contest? Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Adog104. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: ((subst:NPR invite)). Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Adog, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.

Our top scorers in round 1 were:

• Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
• FrB.TG , a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
• Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
• Ceranthor, Numerounovedant, Carbrera, Farang Rak Tham and Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

The second round of the 2018 WikiCup has now finished. Most contestants who advanced to the next round scored upwards of 100 points, but two with just 10 points managed to scrape through into round 3. Our top scorers in the last round were:

• Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with three featured articles
• Iazyges, with nine good articles and lots of bonus points
• Yashthepunisher, a first time contestant, with two featured lists
• SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with seventeen good topic articles
• Usernameunique, a first time contestant, with fourteen DYKs
• Muboshgu, a seasoned competitor, with three ITNs and
• Courcelles, another first time contestant, with twenty-seven GARs

So far contestants have achieved twelve featured articles between them and a splendid 124 good articles. Commendably, 326 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2018 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. 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; most of the GARs are fine, but a few have been a bit skimpy.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

The third round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Courcelles, a first time contestant, with 1756 points, a tally built largely on 27 GAs related to the Olympics
• Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three GAs on natural history and astronomy topics
• SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with a variety of submissions related to transport in the state of Washington

Contestants managed 7 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 120 good articles, 1 good topic, 124 DYK entries, 15 ITN entries, and 132 good article reviews. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 458 GA reviews, in comparison to 244 good articles submitted for review and promoted. As we enter the fourth round, remember that 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. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process; several submissions, particularly in abstruse or technical areas, have needed additional work to make them completely verifiable.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk), Vanamonde (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello Adog, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello! I, (TheMasterGuru), would like to invite you to join WikiProject YouTube! We're working on: Writing, cleaning up, and expanding articles about YouTube, in particular, these articles Putting ((WikiProject YouTube)) on the talk pages of articles involving YouTube, and assessing articles with the template. This helps to categorize articles! Sourcing BLP's affiliated with YouTube Updating the project page, and spreading word about the project and more! It seems you might be interested, so please stop by! Thank you.

The fourth round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The eight users who made it to the final round had to score a minimum of 422 points to qualify, with the top score in the round being 4869 points. The leaders in round 4 were:

• Courcelles scored a magnificent 4869 points, with 92 good articles on Olympics-related themes. Courcelles' bonus points alone exceeded the total score of any of the other contestants!
• Kees08 was second with 1155 points, including a high-scoring featured article for Neil Armstrong, two good topics and some Olympics-related good articles.
• Cas Liber, with 1066 points, was in third place this round, with two featured articles and a good article, all on natural history topics.
• Other contestants who qualified for the final round were Nova Crystallis, Iazyges, SounderBruce, Kosack and Ceranthor.

During round four, 6 featured articles and 164 good articles were promoted by WikiCup contestants, 13 articles were included in good topics and 143 good article reviews were performed. There were also 10 "in the news" contributions on the main page and 53 "did you knows". Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

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 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. 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, and let the best editor win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mako (roller coaster) 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 Gonzo fan2007 -- Gonzo fan2007 (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

The article Mako (roller coaster) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mako (roller coaster) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gonzo fan2007 -- Gonzo fan2007 (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

The article Mako (roller coaster) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mako (roller coaster) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gonzo fan2007 -- Gonzo fan2007 (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure it was the wrong day. It happened on 30 Sep 2018 in California, and there isn't really any news about it until after 8:00 PM, which would imply that it happened on 1 Oct 2018 UTC, which is how Wikipedia is organized. Am I missing something? McKay (talk) 03:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@Mckaysalisbury: Ah, no you're good, I only referred to the date (October 1) as the post you made was under the corresponding portal date. Post though according to when it happened in UTC (September 30 in this case). I would also suggest looking at the In The News criteria to make sure the article in question is up-to-par, as ITN doesn't consider stub articles so expand where you can to meet the minimal standard of quality. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 04:02, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

On 4 October 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mako (roller coaster), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that upon its completion in 2016 at SeaWorld Orlando, Mako became the tallest, longest, and fastest roller coaster in the Orlando area? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mako (roller coaster). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Time Traveler (roller coaster), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KFSM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Adog, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing ((copyvio-revdel)) on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I'm TonyTheTiger. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Teladoc have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:15, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger:; Wouldn't the introduction or history section need to be reworded because of how aligned they are to different sources [1]? I don't know about that image either, doesn't it seem not to be properly tagged? Kind regards. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 22:10, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

That summary says violation unlikely.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:38, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger: You may trout me for that then, perhaps I didn't look at that as well. :P But photo correctly addressed? I'm not an expert in images but it doesn't seem correctly formatted. Nothing big but just a slight concern. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 16:02, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Courcelles (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 147 GAs, 111 GARs, 9 DYKs, 4 FLs and 1 ITN. Our finalists were as follows:

1. Courcelles (submissions)
2. Kosack (submissions)
3. Kees08 (submissions)
4. SounderBruce (submissions)
5. Cas Liber (submissions)
6. Nova Crystallis (submissions)
7. Iazyges (submissions)
8. Ceranthor (submissions)

All those who reached the final win awards, and awards will also be going to the following participants:

• Cas Liber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for three featured articles in round 2.
• Courcelles (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 92 good articles in round 3.
• Kosack (submissions) wins the FL prize, for five featured lists overall.
• Cartoon network freak (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 30 articles in good topics overall.
• Usernameunique (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 24 did you know articles in round 3.
• Zanhe (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 17 in the news articles overall.
• Aoba47 (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 43 good article reviews in round 1.

Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2019 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 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email) and Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email).