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.

Hey, its been a while but I have updated the cover photo for it. I slightly modified it as a whole but here are some of the changes I made:

• I made the dog a lighter color, which makes it more noticeable
• I removed the white line, which was made by an error.
• I rounded the dog out making it smoother

And I also fixed the cats paw. So it doesnt look square anymore but more rounded as it should. Just letting you know, so I'd like any feedback. If they are any other changes you think should be made feel free to tell me. I also posted it on the talk page. But it looks a lot better so hope you like it. BlackDragon 20:20, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey while Im here I would also recommend updating the barnstar and stuff since it still has the old logo. BlackDragon 15:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I've submitted a request for the logo to be vectorized (SVG). Once someone does that, I'll update the barnstar. Thanks for your work, Brambleclawx 17:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

While I'm here, a reminder that you do not yet meet the edit count requirement to display the Veteran Editor III service award. Brambleclawx 18:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Your Welcome. It looks much better. But I think you are confused on what the requirements are. Its not how long you have had an account or edits on the account. You can count edits from IP addresses, (which I have a few), As well as other Wiki's such as Zeldawiki, Wikia, Bulbagarden and so on. I do a lot of work over their too. Usually when Im not on here. I have tried to round the edits into one and its just around the requirements. Its all on the honor systems, besides I usually do Big edits. I could easily "add and remove" a few thousand times but that would suck. So I think its fair to add. BlackDragon 20:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

(TPS) I don't. You're w-a-y short of being a Veteran III editor; honour systems are only honourable when you honour them - and although you've nearly been here for 3 years, your edit count of 2,400 is somewhat short of the 16,000 required. Those other Wiki's you mention are entirely unconnected with Wikipedia and edits there don't count. The honourable thing would be to remove it and replace it with the Journeyman award. Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Again, I dont have to of had this account for 3 years. Its 3 years of editing, besides I have. Its 2500 on here anyways. It says and I quote "If you want to count edits on other Wikimedia projects, that's okay too.".... So... Yeah its fine to count. I have a ton more on their. So I have made over that many on Wiki. BlackDragon 23:38, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Hm, well, 2,500 is still a little short of 16,000 edits... Zeldawiki, Wikia, Bulbagarden and others are not part of the Wikimedia Foundation and edits there don't count. I've been here over 4 years and only just done over 10,000 edits - and I'm quite prolific. If you feel you're entitled to show the award - ok, but nobody else does.

Not entirely comfortable using another editors talk page to discuss this with you, but I feel slightly justified in that Brambleclawx brought it up first, however I think I'm done with this - apologies to Brambleclawx. Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

No need to apologize. TPS's are perfectly welcome on my talk. Brambleclawx 14:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I would really prefer not to have a big argument over this. It is honour system, which is why it's irking me slightly, but on the whole, it's not hurting anyone besides the fact that you are basically advertising to have made more edits than you really have, which in then end, means next to nothing. As Chaheel says, Zeldawiki, Bulbapedia, etc. are Wikia projects, and are not considered other Wikimedia projects. Being a ThunderClan warrior and Gryffindor, I would stick by my assertion that the honourable thing to do is simply to change it to a Journeyman award, keep editing, and feel the genuine sense of accomplishment when you do reach 16000 edits on Wikimedia projects. That said, "displaying the wrong one carries no penalty", so I'm not going to force you to change it, nor am I going to edit your page for you because you have requested that others not edit your page. In the end, I am basically offering you my genuine opinion, and explaining it to you because I feel you have misinterpreted the idea of service awards, which are meant simply as a pretty way of representing your time on Wikipedia and your edit count. If you wish to continue asserting that you have made 16,000 edits, I won't force my opinion on you. Brambleclawx 14:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

For that matter, I don't recall the Warriors Barnstar ever having been awarded on your talk page. Brambleclawx 14:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

_{(Insert) self awarded right here...}

I understand, but I read it that all wikimedia projects count. And as the others use a mediawiki format, then they count. Thats how I Take it and the page states that "you may count the edits however you please to give yourself the best fitting award." So I tried to round the edits into one, which is around 16k, a little more or a little less, But in the area. I wouldnt cheat it, I honor it. If it didnt state that, then I would. But I have been editing over 3 years (even with this account) and have a combined total over that. With all of that in mind I feel it is okay to display. It never said only on Wikipedia. BlackDragon 17:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I also respect that you honor my wish not to edit my page. BlackDragon 17:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

If you insist on including websites that have nothing to do with Wikimedia, you might as well include Facebook & Twitter or indeed every time you fire up Google - then you could give yourself the Vanguard Editor award.

Incidentally, do you see the irony in your insisting that people stay off your userpage, yet you refused to honour the same courtesy on my talk page?

Definitely done now, this is starting to look like WP:IDHT, and I get enough of that with all the kiddies over at the HP pages. Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:35, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Really, I detect a hint of sarcasm here. Its not necessary. Vanguard, I have not been editing (or Using the internet for that matter), for that long, and I dont use those things. Their stupid. Either way Im through talking about this. They are mediawiki projects, not social media crap. I have edited them, just as I would on here. And I never messed with your page. BlackDragon 01:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

You really searched through all of my history? No free time? Just asking. I moved it to my page. BlackDragon 01:12, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

See Wikia#Wikia and the Wikimedia Foundation which notes Wikia is not a Wikimedia project. All Wikimedia projects are listed on WP:SIS. Anyone can download the Mediawiki software to run their own Wiki, and I certainly wouldn't call a Wiki I start using their software a Wikimedia project. Brambleclawx 14:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I do have to say, however, that I'm not entirely happy that you awarded a barnstar to yourself. Barnstars aren't meant to be self-awarded. Brambleclawx 14:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I was actually just messing around after I found the barnstar a while back. I didnt know what it was, but I liked it. So I Put it their as a way to show I was in WikiProject Warriors. But Its not like I havent done the work to earn it. BlackDragon 16:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

You can show your participation in WikiProject Warriors using the userbox ((User Warriors)). And usually, whether you've earned one is not judged by yourself. Brambleclawx 01:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes I realize that. When It was posted however, I did not. I have done a ton of work for it though, and created a few book pages, as well as expanded many though. But the group is definitely not as big anymore. But if you awarded it to me... BlackDragon 03:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey I just noticed that your Warning templates also say Will. I noticed you changed warn4 so I fixed warn3 for you, if you didnt know. BlackDragon 23:34, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I also updated the logo as Brambleberry noticed the head was slightly darker, so it should be better now. BlackDragon 23:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't use the 3 and 4 templates much these days, so didn't notice the wording until recently. However, I have reverted your bolding, for reasons I feel have already been explained. Thank you anyway for the thought though. The image has been vectorized, and I have added it to the project page. Brambleclawx 03:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Your Welcome. I didn't know if you just didn't add it but I did fix the third one for you. I looks a ton better though. Its a good thing I fixed the head just in time lol. Glad its finished though. BlackDragon 16:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rohrbach Ro IX, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rohrbach (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:37, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I am brand new to wikipedia, and was wondering...Once my page is created, are there further steps I need to take to be verified through wikipedia? And will it show up in search results like Google?

Thanks! --Firstexperience (talk) 21:23, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Nope, everything should be fine. It will show up soon, as soon as Google's webcrawler gets to it. Just as a note, on Wikipedia articles, we don't use "title case" for headings; regular "sentence case" (capitalize the first word, and any proper nouns, but no other common nouns) is used instead. Brambleclawx 22:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Brambleclawx. You have new messages at Brambleberry of RiverClan's talk page.
Message added 15:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

öBrambleberry of RiverClan 15:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		For helping out on the AfD for DarkSoul! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

• I thought it was a made up character! Thanks for being an expert on the series and weighing in! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Just doing my Warriors thing. Brambleclawx 15:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

You don't happen to have a Booklist Online account, do you? I'm working on A Hidden Enemy in my sandbox, and the Booklist review is subscription-only. For The Empty City I cheated and read the whole review on Amazon while linking to the Booklist review, but Amazon only has the Kirkus Reviews review, which I've already gotten. All I need is a quick copy-and-paste of the review, the writer of the review, and the publication date. If you don't have a Booklist Online account, do you happen to know anyone who does? öBrambleberry of RiverClan 21:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

[1] (that's my local library) has the review in full, including reviewer name. Under item details, click the reviews tab. Publication date, I retrieved using my library's online database access, specifically through NoveList K-8 Plus through EBSCO. It says: "Phelan, Carolyn (Reviewed 05-01-2013) (Booklist, vol 109, number 17, p87)" which should be more than enough info for you. Also I discovered a cool place on Wikipedia: Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. Brambleclawx 14:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much! You're right, that place is cool. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 14:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I find my library catalogue a good place for looking for reviews. I believe catalog.dclibrary.org is similar. They just lack publication dates and volume and page numbers. Brambleclawx 14:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

You recently offered a statement in 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/Infoboxes. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 31, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ²¹ 17:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dances with Wolves (novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Blake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Brambleclawx: I'm new to wikipedia editing and appreciate your help and input!KimKirchherr (talk) 20:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. If you need anything, just ask. Brambleclawx 20:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Brambleclawx. You have new messages at Brambleberry of RiverClan's talk page.
Message added 17:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

öBrambleberry of RiverClan 17:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I am sorry for the confusion I was trying to post a message for the reviewer but instead I somehow I managed to become the reviewer and I am not sure how to fix it. Do you know how to fix it? Thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind welcome. GMD-tcb (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome, and the helpful information! AH UDelLib (talk) 14:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Brambleclawx 14:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Midnight Zoo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carnegie medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:44, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

On 4 August 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Midnight Zoo, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that The Midnight Zoo won the CBCA Children's Book of the Year Award for Older Readers in 2011? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Midnight Zoo. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Alex Shih(talk) 00:02, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.10, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 22:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

warrior for "A project is a group of people."
Thank you, cat bass clarinettist, for quality articles on Warriors, for improving music such as A Ceremony of Carols, for offering simple wisdom: "A project is a group of people." and "All this user is saying is give peace a chance", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Wow, thanks Gerda. Brambleclawx 15:59, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookies and the welcome note! --lindseydewar (talk) 18:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Brambleclawx 21:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I haven't really been paying attention - how have you been writing the Warriors articles? British English, or American English? "Pepper" @ 03:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

That's a good question. I want to write it in british, but I haven't really paid attention so may have written in American. that's what happens when you live in Canada. Brambleclawx 12:09, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good! "Pepper" @ 00:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Aircraft Factory F.E.10, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 13:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

So the header says it all, but i'll repeat. Thanks! --John.Donoghue (talk) 14:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem. Brambleclawx 14:57, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Warriors: The New Prophecy may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

is very nice. Will it be ok if I steal it and edit it a bit for my own use? Regards, Iselilja (talk) 14:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Certainly, go ahead. I got bits of mine off other people's templates too. Brambleclawx 15:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 18:06, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail. Airplaneman ✈ 07:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey Brambleclawx, I wonder why you reverted my edits on Warriors, while they were just about grammar mistakes? Was I wrong about the mistake? But the sentence 'He lost his last life in The Last Hope in the final battle against the spirit of Tigerstar. His previous names include Firepaw, Fireheart, and Rusty (his name when he is a housecat).' doesn't completely make sense. I think it should be 'when he was a housecat' instead. Am I wrong? -.- confused Dreamfigure (talk) 10:04, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah... it's this really nitpicky fine point in formal writing about literature, that you write always in the present tense. Like, ALWAYS. It was the weirdest thing for me when I first learned that, but I'm getting used to it. Anyway, the idea is that what happens in a book is always happening. Which is to say, Firestar's name doesn't stop being "Rusty" in Into the Wild even after you close the book, or when you read the next book, because that first book still exists and in it, he is still called that. I'm sorry if it seems really weird. English. What a language. Brambleclawx 02:49, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Dreamfigure (talk) haz givn u Lolcat! Lolcatz promot teh WikiLovez and hoapfully thiz one tuk away ur sadz. Spredd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Lolcat, or if tey hav one, give a cheezburgr for teh Lolcat 2 snak on!

Spredd teh goudnez of Lolcats to all cheezburgr buddiez by addin ((subst:Lolcat)) to their talk paj wit frendli messuj to all!

Hello. XFactor123 (talk) 09:39, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. You recently added a reference to the Cetaceans section of Tool use in animals. "At least some wild bottlenose dolphins use tools.^[1]" I do not have a copy of the book but would like to know what type of tool use by dolphins is discussed in the book? Perhaps this could be added to the article?__DrChrissy (talk) 19:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I believe it was the sponges mentioned in the next sentence. The book can be seen in part on Google Books. Brambleclawx 15:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Tal Brenev. I've recently left a message at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Classical music/Compositions task force, in an attempt to revive the WikiProject. I will try to send a message to everyone on the list of participants, so as to get more suggestions and/or ideas. If you would like to participate, leave a message at the WikiProject Talk Page, or on my talk page. Thanks!

---Tal Brenev (talk) 22:42, 23 January 2014 (

{tls|Sharethecookies))

Cookies are yum xx

Dreamfigure (talk) 13:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

How do you obtain Userboxes? Iv'e been wondering for a while.

- User:Sig/Summerleaf

(talk page stalker) Start here. Airplaneman ✈ 05:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm new, but I hope to help more people like you helped me! Thanks again! ^^ WhisperWindz~ 14:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Warriors characters may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Tigerheart]], [[#Lionblaze|Lionblaze]], [[#Jayfeather|Jayfeather]], and [[]#Hollyleaf|Hollyleaf]]. However, this was proved wrong throughout the course of the ''Power Of Three'' series, as

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Warriors characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluestar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

How can I upload a .jpg photograph of a living person within the article about the person? This is a photograph that was sent to me personally by the owner who is also the subject of the article, with verbal instructions to upload the photograph into the article. There are no copyrights. How do I demonstrate I have permission to use the photograph? Houston5December 19:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houston5December (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:COPYREQ is the page you want to read. I suggest the person directly upload it him or herself or send an email as directed Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent. You may be able to as this person's appointed representative, I'm not sure. You may wish to confirm with the owner of the photograph what sort of license they wish to release this under;

"Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported" and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)" 

is the general Wikipedia default, but if he or she wishes to completely relinquish control of the image, it could be released to public domain (note that once released, you cannot reverse the decision). Brambleclawx 22:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.143.111.84.117 (talk) 13:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Brambleclawx 15:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Brambleclawx! I'll put whether you got the answer right or wrong on here, so that the other quiz-takers (is that a word?) won't cheat. Anyway, question one was right! I usually go by the main books (within the arcs) so I'll accept Fernshade. I read Yellowfang's Secret a loooong time ago, so I don't remember much. (All the books come from the library, except for Into the Wild and Sunrise) Thanks, ❀Larksky12358❀^Guestbook 18:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC) (PS: my answer to question 8 is: Smudge, and he thought he had to join ThunderClan. You know, the shallow dip in his front yard that was the former SkyClan camp!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larksky12358 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Larksky12358 Yep, you're right! Brambleclawx 20:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• pumps fist* Now I'm going to go add a few more questions....at this rate, it'll be longer that the List of Warriors characters after a few months! Cheers, ❀Larksky12358❀^Guestbook 21:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Haha, good! Brambleclawx 13:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Warriors characters may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• , Graymist, Reedwhisker, Primrosepaw, Pikepaw, Perchkit. Reedwhisker is her son in both versions), Sneezepaw and Mallowpaw (Graymist's kits).
• Pikepaw, and Perchkit, Graymist, and Reedwhisker. Reedwhisker is her son in both versions), Mallowpaw and Sneezepaw (Graymist's kits).

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Both were very short unreferenced stubs, neither appears to have been a redirect previously. Both had bee tagged for speedy for multiple reasons by other editors. The Tiger one ended Watch out for "Leafpool's Wish", which came out on April 22. And, "Dovewing's Silence", which coming out in November, the date not known. I can copy you the text of each if you like, but your suggestion of redirecting makes sense, so I doubt that there is much point Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I will make them redirects. Brambleclawx 13:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Warrior Cats Verbannt.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The user doesn't have a talk page to leave a comment. Not a big deal, but college conferences don't change until July 1. Can you block user until July 1?. I've left notes in comments multiple times, and there are a couple of us protecting pages until July....Pvmoutside (talk) 14:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

You can create a talk page for that user. Which I've already done when I posted an edit-warring notice on his/her talk page. Also, I don't have administrator privileges, so I can't block (and even if I could, I don't think I would be allowed to block a user who hasn't been warned yet). But anyway, leaving notes on user talks are a much more direct way of informing users why they should stop a certain type of editing, as opposed to in edit summaries, since you can elaborate on why you've decided as a group to not change it until July 1. Brambleclawx 14:23, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note.....I'm giving up. The info is technically wrong for 12 more hours. If the user is that adamant about making the changes without reading why he is technically incorrect until midnight tonight, then I can overlook the edits. Ashame they can't wait......Pvmoutside (talk) 15:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Brambleclawx

Thanks for your message. Please free to delete my new page Gadicherla V.R. Rao if it does not meet the Wikipedia guidelines.

I will then try to collect the details again (from the family members) and create a new page

Thanks again --Kautilya1 (talk) 02:59, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

It's been deleted already, and I wasn't the one who tagged it for deletion in the first place. That said you need reliable secondary sources: collecting information from family members is considered pirmary/original research. Brambleclawx 14:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Brambleclawx! I just wanted to thank you for welcoming me when I first joined Wikipedia, and for inviting me to the Warriors project earlier today. I would love to join this project, and I just signed up on the project page! :) -Snowbooks1419 — Preceding undated comment added 20:49, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

You're very welcome! Brambleclawx 14:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Brambleclawx,

Some of the images in the above page are deleted. They are: 1. Paul presenting his report to Secretary Chu 2. Paul giving a keynote speech in China 3. Paul receiving the presidential award.

I believe I have selected "None" or something like that for the license while uploading. These photos are published in online news stories and do not have any commercial value.

How do I go about them? Some of the thoughts are: 1. Locate the news stories online and include them in the references. 2. If possible locate the authors of the news stories and try to get their permission 3. If they are taken for Paul (during the event) then can I obtain Paul's consent?

Thank you very much for your help Kautilya1 (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya1. Sorry about the late reply. Your best bets are to find a freely licensed version of those pictures, or contact the photographers and try to get their permission. If Paul owns the rights for the photo, then he could give permission, but he might not have the rights to the pictures, you'd have to ask. Brambleclawx 15:26, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

hello this is Daniel Sky(Daniel Sky (talk) 22:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)) I am new to this so you will have to bare with me. Where do i sign my name on the page which I edited?

Hi Daniel Sky. If you are on a talk page, then at the end of a comment you type four tildes (~~~~) to auto-generate a signature. Brambleclawx 15:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Bmicomp. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Geraldine L. Richmond, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. BMIComp 15:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Note: Posted a question on BMI's talk page. Airplaneman ✈ 00:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, to my amazing TPS. Brambleclawx 13:59, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - September 2014 Welcome to the GA Cup! In less than 72 hours, the competition will begin! Before you all start reviewing nominations we want to make sure you understand the following: This is a friendly competition so we don't want any cheating/breaking of the rules. However, if you do believe someone is going against the rules, notify the judges. All the rules are listed here. If you are a new editor or new to reviewing Good article nominations, it is imperative that you read the 4 essays/guides listed under FAQ #4. If you do not understand something, ask a judge for clarification ASAP! The competition is not entirely about who can review the most nominations. Per the "Scoring" page, there is different criteria in which you can earn more points. Theoretically, you could review 10 nominations and have 80 points but another user could have reviewed 5 nominations and have 100 points. Yes, we want you to review as many nominations as you can as this will greatly increase the number of points you earn, but you must also keep in mind that every single review will be looked over by a judge. If we find that you are "rubber-stamping" (in other words, the review is not complete but you still passed/failed the article) you may be disqualified without warning. Also, rather than creating a long list on what to remember, make sure you have read the "Scoring", "Submissions", and "FAQ" pages. Now for the one question that we guarantee you have: how on earth will the rounds work??? Yes, we never actually had a solid platform regarding how the rounds would work because we had no idea how many people would sign-up. Even though the competition is about to begin, because sign-ups are still open, it is impossible to say exactly how each round will work. As of now, we can confirm that Round 1 will have everyone compete in one big pool. Depending on the final number of participants after sign-ups close, a to-be-determined number of participants will move on (highest scorers will move on) to Round 2. We guarantee that the top 15 will move on, so make sure you aim for those top positions! Moving on to Round 2, participants will be split into pools of even numbers (for example, every pool will have 6 participants). The pools will be determined by a computer program that places participants by random. More details regarding Round 2 will be sent out at the end of Round 1. It is important to note that the GA Cup will run on UTC time, so make sure you know what time that is for where you live! On that note, the GA Cup will start on October 1 at 0:00:01 UTC; Round 1 will end on October 29 at 23:59:59 UTC; Round 2 will commence on November 1 at 0:00:01 UTC. All reviews must be started after or on the start time of the round. If you qualify for Round 2 but do not complete a review before the end of Round 1, the review can be carried over to Round 2; however that review will not count for Round 1. Prior to the start of the the second round, participants who qualify to move on will be notified. Finally, if you know anyone else that might be interesting in participating, let them know! Sign-ups close on October 15 so there is still plenty of time to join in on the action! If you have any further questions, contact one of the judges or leave a message here. On October 16 or 17, 2014, check the Pools page as we will post the exact number of participants that will move on to the next round. Because this number will be determined past the halfway mark of Round 1, we encourage you to aim to be in the top 15 as the top 15 at the end of the round are guaranteed to move on. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 1 As we move into the middle of Round 1, we wanted to report some of the lessons we've learned thus far, as well as announce a major rule change going into Round 2, which begins November 1. Remember, sign-ups for this year's Cup ends on September 15. Thus far, we're very happy with the results of the competition. One of our major goals, reducing the long backlog at GAN, is well on the way to being accomplished, mostly due to the enthusiastic efforts of Jonas Vinther, who has earned over 250 points. Over 80 reviews have been made thus far. Thank you all for your efforts and for your part in making the GA Cup a success. However, this is the inaugural year of the GA Cup, so there have been some unforeseen circumstances that have come up. One has been a glaring inadequacy with the rules, which the judges feel makes the competition unfair. As a result, there will be a major change in the rules, starting at the beginning of Round 2: Your review must provide feedback/suggestions for improvement, and then you must wait until the nominator has responded and all issues/suggestions have been resolved before you can pass the article. Failure to follow this rule will result in disqualification. What this means is that you must provide some feedback to the article's nominator, and must wait for him or her to respond before passing the article. If the nominator has not responded in the standard 7 days, you can fail the article. We're instituting this rule change to prevent the possibility of competitors passing articles for the sake of passing articles (or failing them) and to gain more points. We believe that the change will make it more fair to all competitors in the GA Cup. Also, in case you haven't noticed, we increased the "guarantee" for Round 2 to 25 participants. The exact number will be decided in the near future. We thank your for your participation, and for your flexibility and understanding as we learn what works and what doesn't work in this competition. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:26, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi everyone,

It was brought to the attention of the judges that there was an error in the newsletter sent out earlier today.

Sign-ups for the GA Cup will close on October 15, 2014, not September 15, 2014 (as mentioned in the newsletter).

Sorry for any confusion.

Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 1 Hello GA Cup competitors! The judges have learned a great deal in this first part of the competition, and we appreciate your patience with us as we've figured out what works and what doesn't work. As we reported in our last newsletter, an inadequacy in the scoring system has been illuminated in the past 15 days, which has resulted in a major change in the rules. It has also resulted in one withdrawal. To ensure fairness, we've decided to further increase the number of participants moving onto Round 2. Everyone who has reviewed at least one article will automatically be moved forward, and will be placed in pools. You have until October 29 to take advantage of this opportunity. It is our hope that this will make up for the unforeseen glitch in our scoring system. Best of wishes to all of you as you continue to help improve articles and make Wikipedia a better place. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Your header at your welcome template was causing problems because the </font> closing tag, instead of the </small> tag, was used. I have fixed the typo, if you are fine with that. – Epicgenius (talk) 02:28, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Brambleclawx 23:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween! '"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple. If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add ((subst:Halloween apples)) to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Cheers! "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 18:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 2 Greetings, GA Cup competitors! Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. Jaguar took out Round 1 with an amazing score of 238. In a tight race for second, Peacemaker67 and Ritchie333 finished second and third with 152 and 141 points, respectively. Two users have scored the maximum five bonus points for article length (60,000 characters+). Anotherclown reviewed Spanish conquest of Yucatán (77,350 characters) and MrWooHoo reviewed Communist Party of China (76,740 characters). The longest review was by Bilorv who reviewed Caldas da Rainha. The review was approximately 22,400 characters which earned s/he two bonus points (20, 000 - 29, 999 characters). In Round 1, 117 reviews were completed, making the first round of the GA Cup a success! A total of 86 articles were removed from the backlog during the month of October! We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 2 so we can lower the backlog as much as possible. To qualify for the second round, one completed review was needed, which 28 users accomplished. Participants have been randomly put into 7 pools of 4; the top 2 in each pool will move onto Round 3. There will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 15th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 2 will start on November 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on November 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here Also, remember that a major rule change will go into affect starting on November 1, which marks the beginning of Round Two. Round 1 displayed a weakness in the rules, which we are correcting with this new rule. We believe that this change will make the competition more inherently fair. The new rule is: Your review must provide feedback/suggestions for improvement, and then you must wait until the nominator has responded and all issues/suggestions have been resolved before you can pass the article. Failure to follow this rule will result in disqualification. The judges will strictly enforce this new rule. Good luck and remember to have fun! Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 3 Greetings, all! We hope that all of our American GA Cup competitors had an enjoyable Thanksgiving holiday. Friday saw the end of Round 2. Two from 7 pools, plus a tie score and one wildcard (16 in all) moved onto the next round. Some pools were more competitive than others. Round 2's highest scorer was 3family6, with an impressive 255 points. Good888, who came in second place overall with 202 points, reviewed the most articles (19). The wildcard slot for Round 2 went to Jaguar. Congrats to all! Round 3 will have 15 competitors in three pools. The key to moving forward in Round 2 seemed to be reviewing articles with the longest nomination dates; almost everyone who moved forward nominated at least one article from the pink nomination box (20 points) or reviewed articles that had languished in the queue for over 5 months (18 points). The GA Cup was also used to promote a group of articles about The Boat Race, a rowing race held annually since 1856 between Oxford University and Cambridge University, on the River Thames. 17 Boat Race articles were promoted to GA in November. In Round 2, 110 reviews were completed, as compared to 117 in Round 1. The GA Cup continues to be a success. This month, we got a report from User:AmericanLemming, who maintains the GA statistics, that in October, there was a net gain of 201 articles nominated for GA. He thought that more open GANs could mean that more editors are submitting more of their articles to the GAN process. In addition, having a high-throughput of GANs means that more articles get reviewed more quickly, which reduces the frustration of potentially waiting several months to get an article reviewed. The activity in Round 2 of the GA Cup seems to bear that out. It's our hope that the competitors' enthusiasm continues in Round 3, and we can continue to make a difference in helping more editors improve their articles. For Round 3, participants have been randomly put in 3 pools of 5 contestants each; the top two in each pool progressing, as well as the top 2 of all remaining users. Round 3 will start on December 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on December 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 3 and the pools can be found here. There have been a couple of rules clarifications to announce. We're slightly changing the wording to the second bullet in "General rules", which now reads: You may only score points in a round for reviews which have been completed in that round. We're also including this clarification: Only reviews started during the competition are eligible. We have also lost a judge, so there are now only three judges. Good luck and remember to have fun as we move into the holiday season. It is the judges' hope that every competitor in the GA Cup has a joyous holiday season and Happy New Year. Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 4 Happy New Year! We hope that all of our GA Cup competitors had an enjoyable and safe holiday season. Monday saw the end of Round 3. Eight contestants moved forward to Round 4—the top two contestants from each of Round 3's three pools and the top two participants of all remaining users. It was an exciting competition, especially towards the end. Round 3's highest scorer was Jaguar, Round 2's wildcard, with an impressive 305 points, the highest score in the GA Cup thus far. Pool B was the closest race; J_Milburn and Cwmhiraeth switched places a few times in the final hours of the competition, although J Milburn edged out Cwmhiraeth by just 9 points. Pool A was, by far, the most competitive; four out of five moved onto Round 4, and its competitors earned a cumulative 935 points and reviewed 59 articles. Ritchie333, who came in second overall with 255 points, reviewed the most articles (17). Peacemaker67 and Wizardman earned the two wildcard slots, with 184 and 154 points, respectively. Congrats to all! 114 articles were reviewed this round, as compared to 110 in Round 2 and 117 in Round 1. The key to success in Round 3, like in Round 2, was reviewing articles with the longest nomination dates; everyone who moved forward reviewed articles from the pink nomination box (20 points) or reviewed articles that had languished in the queue for over 5 months (18 points). Many of these articles had languished because their nominators had left Wikipedia and had little chance of passing to GA, so our competitors provided a great service by helping remove them from the queue. Also as in Round 2, The Boat Race articles proved to be popular review choices, with 10% of all the articles reviewed in December. We appreciate the competitors' continued enthusiasm, even during the busy holiday season. At least one competitor even reviewed articles while preparing for a holiday meal! For Round 4, participants have been randomly put in 2 pools of 4 contestants each. The top two in each pool will progress to the finals, as well as the top participant (5th place) of all remaining users. The semi-finals will start on January 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on January 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 4 and the pools can be found here. We received some excellent feedback about how to improve the GA Cup in the future, including the definition of "quickfails" and the use of pools, which we'll seriously consider as we move forward. As a result of this feedback and the experience we've gained, there will be some changes to the rules come next years GA Cup. Good luck to all our semi-finalists! It is the judges' hope that every competitor in the GA Cup continue to have fun and be enthusiastic about reviewing and passing articles to GA! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Dear Brambleclawx,
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! A new year has come! How times flies! 2015 will be a new year, and it is also a chance for you to start afresh! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 08:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook). To use this template, leave ((subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year)) on someone else's talk page.

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 5/Final GA Cup competitors and observers: Get ready, we're about to move into the finals of the inaugural GA Cup! Not nearly as important as another competition taking place this weekend, but significant none the less. No deflated footballs here, though! Thursday saw the end of Round 4. Out of the 8 contestants in the semi-finals, 5 have moved to the finals. The semi-finals continued to be very competitive. The highest scorer overall was Ritchie333 from Pool B, with an impressive 488 points and a total of 36 articles reviewed, the most of any competitor; close behind was Jaguar (last round's wildcard), with 477 points and 29 reviews. At times, the competition between them was a real horse-race, and exciting for the judges to witness. Both Ritchie333 and Jaguar have moved onto the finals. In Pool A, Good888 with 294 points, and Wizardman with 179 also won slots in the final. 3family6 with 285 points, won the wildcard slot. We also had one withdrawal, due to outside-of-Wikipedia priorities. Congrats to all! Although there were just 8 competitors, more reviews were conducted this round than in any other round—148, which demonstrates the commitment and enthusiasm of our participants. The most successful competitors, like in all previous rounds, reviewed articles that languished in the queue at GAC for at least five months (worth 18 points). The Boat Race articles were popular review choices again, with almost 20% of the articles reviewed this month. In other news, we received another report from GA statistics page maintainer User:AmericanLemming. See here [2] for his take on the effect the GA Cup has had on Good Article reviews. He believes that we've made a real difference. AmericanLemming says: "As you can see, ...the GA Cup has done wonders when it comes to getting the oldest nominations reviewed much sooner thanks to the system whereby you get the most points for reviewing the oldest articles." Everyone involved with this competition, especially the competitors, should be very proud of what we've been able to accomplish! The Final will start on February 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on February 26 at 23:59:59 UTC with a winner being crowned. Information about the Final can be found here. Good luck to all our finalists! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I am working on articles related to the Pan Am Games and was looking for a photo of the Markham Pan Am Center. Would it be possible for you to take a picture of the facility? If so can you please do so? Thanks! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Feedback Greetings, all! 4 months ago the GA Cup began and now as it comes to a close, it's time to start thinking about the next competition! Below is a link to a Google Form with several questions. We want to here from you what you thought about the GA Cup. Just over half of the questions are required while the others are optional. If you don't want to answer one of the optional questions, feel free to skip it. Your responses will only be visible to the three judges. Thank-you to all particpants for making the first GA Cup a success and we hope to see you all come out again for the next competition! 2014-15 GA Cup Feedback Form Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Finals/Wrap-Up The inaugural GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists. The winner of the 2014/2015 GA Cup is Jaguar! He earned an impressive 615 points, despite only being a wildcard in the Round 4. The key to Jaguar's success seemed to be reviewing lots of articles as well as reviewer the oldest nominations; he reviewed 39 nominations in this round. Overall, the key to everyone's success was reviewing articles that had been in the queue for at least three months, which was true throughout the competition. In second place was Wizardman, with 241 points, and following close behind in third place was Good888, with 211 points. Congrats! Although there were a couple of bumps along the way, the judges have thoroughly enjoyed managing this competition. We hope that the participants had fun as well. The GA Cup was a resounding success, and that's due to all of you. The judges sincerely thank each and every participant, and for the editors who were willing to subject their articles to this process. We learned a lot. For example, we learned that even with meticulous planning, it's impossible to anticipate every problem. We learned that the scoring system we set up wasn't always the most effective. The enthusiasm and motivation of Wikipedians is awesome, and we enjoyed watching what was sometimes fierce competition. We look forward to the second GA Cup later this year. We reached many of our goals. See here for GA Cup statistics. We made a big difference, especially in shortening the length of time articles spend in the queue, and in reducing the backlog. Overall, 578 nominations were reviewed throughout the competition and a total of 8,184 points were awarded. Everyone involved should be very proud of what we've accomplished through the GA Cup. Stay tuned for more information about our next competition. There will be some much-needed changes made in the scoring system next time. We appreciate your feedback, and commit to seriously consider it. If you haven't already, please fill out the feedback form here. If you're interested in being a judge in our second GA Cup, please let one of our judges know or click on the tab found in the feedback form. Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — ((U|Technical 13)) (e • t • c) 04:21, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 2nd GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Our inaugural competition, which ran from October 2014 to April 2015, was such a resounding success that we'd like to do it again. Currently, there are over 500 GANs ready to be reviewed; competitors in the previous GA Cup reviewed about 570 GAs, so we can again make a huge impact in helping editors improve articles in Wikipedia and decrease the traditionally long queue at GAN. The 2nd GA Cup will begin on July 1, 2015. As last time, five rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on November 28, 2015), but this may change based on participant numbers. The judges learned a lot during the 1st GA Cup which exposed weaknesses in its system. Using both the feedback from last year's participants and the weaknesses discovered, we've revised the scoring system to make it more fair. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same. We also are introducing three new judges: 3family6, Jaguar and MrWooHoo. So in total, there will be six judges. We hope this will allow the competition to run more smoothly. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on July 15, 2015. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Dom497, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo, and TheQ Editor.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! ^^ ♪ Silvermint ♪ 16:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Bramble! I just have a question about my signature. Is there a way to incorporate a page's code ( in this case, User:Silvermint/Sig) into the signature box of my preferences? --♪ Silvermint ♪ 22:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Silvermint. I don't see anything on that page. That said, I'm pretty sure you can use a transclusion to make your signature output whatever is on that page. So just do it like any other template: ((User:Silvermint/Sig)) which will cause it to change whenever you change that page; that, or you can do a substitution: ((subst:User:Silvermint/Sig)) which will insert the wikicode from the page when you hit save; later changes to that subpage wouldn't change earlier instances of your signature. Brambleclawx 00:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Brambleclawx, it is over two months since you last posted to this review, and there's only a single specific comment by you to it so far. The article was originally nominated last November, so it's now been waiting for approximately eight months. Given your irregular editing schedule and the lack of progress, I'd like to suggest that the nomination be returned to the reviewing pool. Since the GA Cup has just started, and there are reviewers looking for the oldest nominations like this one would be, the wait for a new reviewer would likely be short.

If you haven't replied in the next week or so—certainly whenever you're next active—I'll probably put the nomination back into the pool. I trust you won't mind. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

BlueMoonset that'll probably be for the best. I'd thought I would have more time this summer, but apparently not. Brambleclawx 00:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I'm looking to help re-activate the Percy Jackson Task-force. As you are one of the few supporters still actively editing Wikipedia, I wanted to extend an invitation for you to work with me to do this. If you are no longer interested, I'd appreciate your taking the time to remove your username from the "Supporters" list here. And thanks for all you did before!

If you are interested, firstly I'd like to invite you to become a full member, as the requirements for membership are going to be lowered in the near future (I know they scared me away on the first try). I would also ask you to consider a proposal I have, which is that this task-force become the "Rick Riordan" task-force. I've suggested this because I think it would help keep the project active and also help stop some pretty widespread vandalism in articles referring to that author. My proposal in brief. I'm a relatively new Wikipedian, so I'd appreciate the advice and expertise of a more experienced user. Thanks again in advance, and feel free to contact me on my Talk page. 2ReinreB2 (talk) 01:41, 23 July 2015 (UTC)