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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Could we add Nova 9: Return of Gir Draxon and Stellar 7? I read the plots of these games were retconned into the Tribes series.
Also I made Siege series as an article about the continuity as a whole I hoped we could add. I figured because "Earthsiege" and "Starsiege" are both historically part of it and "siege" is in common even if it is later more well known as Tribes. Ranze (talk) 10:58, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.
Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:
Other contributors of note include:
Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...
March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!
A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. 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. 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi GamerPro - You commented a while ago at WP:Featured article review/Barbara McClintock/archive1. The article has undergone quite a bit of work, and the review now needs additional comments. If you have the time and interest, would you mind returning to the article to expand or revise your existing comments? Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 16:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Just hittin' ya back. I answered the questions, but I might go back and add a bit more. Don't wait to publish on my account if I haven't by the time you're ready, though. Thanks much! --Teancum (talk) 00:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey GamerPro64; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Since Rambo's Revenge hasn't edited for six months, I've left you a message at the FTRC you've just launched (without notifying anyone else, which is a little odd....) The Rambling Man (talk) 20:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
I hardly touched the Wings of Liberty article and have never worked on the Heart of the Swarm article. I'd suggest informing WP:VG if you want to organise some work for those. As you already noted, I'm too inactive to do anything about it, so there's no point telling me. -- Sabre (talk) 01:24, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Great news about the promotion; I have a question however. In the Dan Leno article history and the Songs, sketches and monologues of Dan Leno article history, it is down as a "good topic". Should this be featured? -- CassiantoTalk 15:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Cheers - still waiting on a 100% confirmed release date as far as I can see (wasn't listed on Amazon last time I checked) btu hopefully should be able to start some solid work on the article soon......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Possible ban discussion on Niemti?. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:14, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
I've been incredibly busy for the past few weeks, apologies for the delay. I'll get round to it on Saturday, most likely. Et3rnal 17:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't know what DLC is but I hope this was a joke. — Cirt (talk) 16:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I just noticed your barnstar now :) I was away for a few days, and I'm still not used to the new talk page notifications (seriously gonna miss the big orange banner at the top of every page, it's too subtle now!) But I thank you for the kind words. I love getting whole topics to GT or FT. It's one of my favorite things to do on Wiki. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Now, some of you might be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 01:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC) |
Thank you for your participation at WP:TFAR for 1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?).
Regardless of the outcome, I think it's a good thing to have a discussion about these sorts of issues.
I hope you're doing well, — Cirt (talk) 23:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members).
So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC) |
Sent to PR, I'll supp nom it at FTC whenever that closes. I think that it's too short right now for FLC, may after next year's nominations. --PresN 17:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Go for it! I haven't edited it since 2007, on the grounds that I was tired of dealing with people turning it into their own personal bulletin board. I would ask that you start with the article the day it became featured: if you have problems with that, then we can talk. Otherwise, we can solve it with some simple reversions. Palm_Dogg (talk) 19:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Hey GamerPro,
I'm currently reviewing Castlevania: Lords of Shadow for GA, and it has a number of sources I'm not familiar with. I know you've been active specifically on the question of RSs in video game GAs. Is there a faster way to double-check these for reliability than a mass-posting at WP:RS/N?
The sources in question are:
*Joystiq
*Siliconera
Thanks for any guidance you can give! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. Didn't have a chance to finish before I set off for travel but you should hear from me early next week. Cheers. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 22:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
I read your recent WPVG newsletter feature about FPCs. I've collected a number of free-use images and animated GIFs from indies recently, including Ridiculous Fishing, Vlambeer, TowerFall, Broforce, Virtuix Omni, Dan "Artosis" Stemkoski. Do you see anything that may be a good candidate (perhaps after some cleanup)? czar · · 22:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
'Ay, thanks for the well-wishes and warm welcome. :v - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 23:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
This is going to take a while, so if you could help me clean up Little Mac and Crono, that'd be a ton of help. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 00:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey GamerPro64/Archive 5, you have a reply at my talk page, for when you have a moment czar · · 13:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
Technical 13 (talk) 20:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Yup. You'll note I added the retention date myself. I've already gotten up the article to near-GAR quality, just going to wait on the pending DYK nom and postseason results/awards so the 'aftermath' section is stable before nominating. Staxringold talkcontribs 23:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Seeing as how the original soundtrack for Final Fantasy XIV has finally been released as of August 14, should Wikipedia:Featured topics/Music of the Final Fantasy series be put on retention like similar topics that deal with music? For instance, even if Matangi (album) wasn't currently created, wouldn't Wikipedia:Featured topics/M.I.A. albums still be on retention for that article's status? I guess what I'm asking is, does it matter that Music of Final Fantasy XIV has been created or not if the OST has already been out for a month and a half?
On a related note, I see that you are now the sole delegate for G/FTs, and I also see that being an administrator is not a requirement to be one. You may have noticed my involvement on updating the retention page, and nominating some topics for removal in the past, in addition to creating and maintaining Wikipedia:Featured topics/Video games developed by Key. I was wondering if it'd be possible to nominate myself as a delegate.--十八 08:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, it's me again. Today, I commented at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Battlecruisers of the World/archive1 about two support voters who were listed as contributors of WP:OMT, a task force for improving articles in the topic's scope, and I was following your example in Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/John Edward Brownlee/archive1. However, this got me thinking and I realized that Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Header doesn't specify that you shouldn't vote if you contributed to an article or articles in a topic reaching their statuses. Seeing as how Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions#Step 2: Starting a review makes this clear for GANs, should the FTC instructions be updated to also reflect this?--十八 21:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Channel Awesome shows is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Channel Awesome shows until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Gamer, thx for advising. Perhaps you might put a note ahead of time in the FC box in the newsroom, which is cleaned out after each edition is published. Cheers. Tony (talk) 06:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Sure; what range would you like me to handle?--十八 22:07, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Combining Wikipedia:Featured topics/Alaska class cruisers and Wikipedia:Featured topics/Indefatigable class battlecruisers into this new topic shouldn't be too bad; just have to be careful with the topic/article counts. Just tell me what you want me to do.--十八 22:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
12george1 is also opposing the topic now, so I'd say it's safe to fail it.--十八 21:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Given it's been kept at MfD, I've reposted a proposal to tighten it. See header. Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:43, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey there. I think you meant to contact User:Yellow Evan when you posted on my talk page, but either way, he took care of the comments that 12George1 mentioned. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! A GAN Backlog Drive will begin in less than 4 days! In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. |
Hello! Just a friendly reminder that the GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on December 31, 2013! If you know anyone outside of the WikiProject that may be interested, feel free to invite them to the drive! |
Best of luck with the review! Unfortunately I will be unable to participate, as I already took upon the responsibility of reviewing Dota 2's GAN nomination, and even that alone is slow progress. Don't have much time for the wiki these days. :( Cheers, · Andonic contact 18:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
My opinion is that since the coach has an article now, he should be in the topic. I'm not so sure about the assistant coach, since he's not even mentioned in the main article. However, there doesn't seem to be any opposition to not having the coach in the topic at this time, and since I believe the coach's article would probably pass GAN anyway, it'd probably be safe to pass the topic now.--十八 22:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Wow, you're fast at updating the history for Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/to do, right after I just nominated Civ 4 too. Was it something semi-automated like the repeated edit summary on the page history? TeleComNasSprVen (talk • contribs) 02:00, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Since you're one of the only people I know who has an interest in Mega Man articles (I know of others but haven't interacted with them on the series w/ respect to Wikipedia), I was wondering if you could do me a solid and do a nice little copy edit of this article. I'm hoping to bring it to GA once I get a second pair of eyes to fix the almost guaranteed problems I overlooked.
On a related note, I recently gathered up a number of sources for Mega Man: Powered Up - more than enough to make an extremely strong article - and will be splitting the game out to its own article in the near future. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 07:02, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
No, WP:SE doesn't cover articles on games that Square Enix/it's subsidiaries only published, not developed, barring extenuating circumstances (specific series that we've agreed to cover regardless). Mainly for reasons like this- there's a ton of minor games out there that SE or SEEurope publishes that would just clutter up our article index and never get worked on. --PresN 04:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Paviliolive (talk) 16:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)