I would like permission to edit the 4kids entertainment article please

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Alfred R. Kahn—because it 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. Materialscientist (talk) 08:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks could you help me out the al Kahn related edits when I make them next Kirbopher2004 (talk) 22:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay guys since a majority of you have a bot how do I get one? Kirbopher2004 (talk) 05:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Alfred R. Kahn, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok did it again but this time with a link to the YouTube video that I got the information from Kirbopher2004 (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Materialscientist I had an idea how about when I make Alfred R Kahn edit you help me out in refining it Kirbopher2004 (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Beast Wars: Transformers, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 13:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I reverted your edit to Transformers: Beast Wars. The current text is correct:

Transformers: Beast Wars is an entertainment franchise from Hasbro, and it is part of the larger Transformers franchise. The fiction directly follows the Transformers: Generation 1 continuity established by the 1984 series and animated film. It ignores the continuity established by the Japanese Transformers series, though this franchise would have two exclusive Japanese series of its own.

Note that no one ever called the G1 show anime. There are two G1 shows - one American and one Japanese. The Japanese show expanded on the American show with more characters and episodes. The article specifically states that Transformers: Beast Wars continues on the American G1 show while ignoring the Japanese one. JIP | Talk 17:12, 20 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, there. I'm responding to your edit made on voice actor Paul Dobson's wiki page. The date you put was December 7, 1963. I have reason to believe that the date used by behindthevoiceactors.com (BTVA) is incorrect. I found this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXN9twV-IsY) of Paul's brother Michael being interviewed by fellow voice actor Brent Miller. The video states that Michael is the "eldest Dobson". Assuming Michael's birthday of August 12, 1966 is correct (Michael has a website with links to both BTVA and IMDb), that would mean that Paul must have been born later. If the third brother, Brian Dobson, was born September 9, 1973, or 10 years after the eldest, Michael (I can't confirm it at the moment), then Paul is likely to be the second oldest of the three brothers (edit: I've found that Paul IS in fact the second oldest).

Do you think you can help me pass this information onto other wiki users?

I would be most grateful. AtlantisBabylon123 (talk) 00:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well from what I heard Michael is the oldest Dobson Paul is the middle and Brian is the youngest.

About getting in contact with Michael, I'm not very good with social media, so it's not going to be easy, especially since I live in Sydney (Australia) and Michael lives in Vancouver. An incorrect date of birth is not that big of an issue. I do think, however, that if wiki pages of individuals are going to include such personal details, they should be correct. The Dobsons are prolific voice actors, but not high-profile celebrities. So it may take some time before other wiki users get around to making proper edits to their pages. AtlantisBabylon123 (talk) 02:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS Would you mind positioning further responses to this thread IN the thread rather than on my own talk page? Things will be a little more organised that way (Just be sure to indent your paragraphs with an extra colon).

Well could you ask Bloom6132 to get in contact with Michael Dobson about this debate and to leave a message on my talk page about what Michael said about weather or not he is older then Paul or if Paul is older then him? Kirbopher2004 (talk) 22:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

elcome to Wikipedia Kirbopher2004, from WikiProject Editor Retention
Thank you for registering! We hope that you find collaborative editing enjoyable. Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia that started in 2001, is free for all to use and edit within the guidelines and principles users have established and adhere to. Many of these principles and guidelines are listed below. Click on the link next to the images for more information. REMEMBER - each policy and guideline page has a discussion you can join to ask questions, add input and contribute your voice towards any current policy or guideline change underway! Join the discussion by going to the talk page of the article. Please take a minute to view a number of quick start pages for an overview of how to work within these guidelines and more information to help you better understand the practices and procedures editors are using. These include: The Newcomers Manual and User:Persian Poet Gal/"How-To" Guide to Wikipedia. Sometimes new editors become frustrated quickly and find their experience on Wikipedia less than enjoyable. This need not be. If you are having a difficult time for any reason, please feel free to ask me for assistance! Or, better yet, visit The Teahouse where veteran editors are waiting to assist you.
	Policies, guidelines and peer assistance		Help and Tutorials
	The five pillars of Wikipedia. The fundamental principles of the project.		Tutorial. Step-by-step guide on how to edit.
	Main policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia's main policies and guidelines.		How to start a page. If you want to create a new article
	Style Guide. The complete guide to how articles should look.		Help. The complete help guide
	Copyright. Addressing copyright concerns.		Quick reference. A handy quick reference guide for editing Wiki.
	Help Desk. Here you can ask other editors for assistance		Your user pages and your sandbox. Editing in your own "personal" space
	Adoption program. Request an experienced guide for your first steps of editing.		Frequently asked questions. Some common questions and their answers.

This is being posted on your talk page where you can receive messages from other Wikipedians and discuss issues and respond to questions. At the end of each message you will see a signature left by the editor posting. This is done by signing with four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking in the editing interface toolbox, located just above the editing window (when editing). You won't need to sign your contributions to articles themselves; you only need to when using talk pages. If you have any questions or face any initial hurdles, feel free to contact me on my talk page and I will do what I can to assist or give you guidance.

Again, welcome! Gog the Mild (talk) 11:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Kirbopher2004 (talk) 20:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Line of succession to the former Russian throne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former Russian throne. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Captain Calm (talk) 05:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please be more careful here: it appears that instead of requesting an undeletion, you copied the material from some other mirror. Without the attribution to the people that originally created the article, this raises a significant copyright concern. I've deleted the article for now; it would probably be best to raise the question at deletion review or make a request to have a copy restored to the draft space so you can try to fix the rather large problem that led to the deletion of the original material. Kuru (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So as a lot of you guys know from edits I made on the Terry Klassen and Ian James Corlett articles that the ocean voices of Goku and Krillin were also writing partners and had a production company that would help with script adaptations of international shows and movies and were hired by Funimation to help with rewriting both dragon ball and dragon ball z but does anyone know what the company was called back in the day and if so could you please tell me the name and then create an article on that company and I could potentially make edits to it when I know more about it. Kirbopher2004 (talk) 06:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why did you take out stoner of the year? deisenbe (talk) 19:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because I don’t think Bill Murray is a stoner or did drugs except maybe a few pills on the set of SNL during his time on there Kirbopher2004 (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any assignments for me Kirbopher2004 (talk) 22:52, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

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

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Our top scorers in Round 2 were:

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

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

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there! My name's Tamzin. I noticed your recent contributions to Steven Spielberg. The edit you reverted was attributed to a reliable source, in this case Forbes (see also WP:FORBES). I understand how you might have missed that, since the editor didn't add a new source; he just updated the access-date on an existing one. But that's the sort of thing it's very important to look for before reverting someone. Reverting someone can make them feel unwelcome, and the last thing we ever want to do is scare anyone away. Importantly, while it's not explicitly policy, if you're reverting someone for any reason other than vandalism or other super-obvious stuff, you should probably use an edit summary. That makes it a lot easier to clear up confusion if any arises. For the meantime, I've reverted your edit, so we're all good. Just please be a bit more careful in the future with what you revert. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out on my talk page, or by replying here with the template ((ping|Tamzin)). Thanks. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 12:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tamzin: I was not thinking people needed to know his net worth Kirbopher2004 (talk) 20:18, 5 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well the article already noted his net worth; all that that edit did was updated the numbers. If you don't think that the article should say his net worth, then you should raise the matter at Talk:Steven Spielberg, explaining why you don't think the information is relevant. Please take a look at our policy on biographies of looking people first.

Also, can I ask why you removed material here and here that had sources?

P.S. I fixed the template for you. You forgot the | before "Tamzin" and the )) after it. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 01:21, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since you didn't answer, I've gone ahead and reverted those removals. Please read Wikipedia:Content removal before removing any more content from articles. Thanks. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 09:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did address the problems Kirbopher2004 (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have done this again at Chevy Chase. Please stop doing this. As both Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Reverting explain, you should explain why you are making a revert. If you continue to make reverts like this, this may be viewed as disruptive editing.

Also, please be more careful when making copy-edits. This edit to ABC Family and this edit to Batman in film both created grammatical errors. "Would be" is just another way of saying "was later", and Filming started in September 1994, Schumacher found Kilmer and Jones difficult to work with is a comma splice. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 02:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok then Jesus Kirbopher2004 (talk) 01:32, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

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

Thanks for the @😀😆 Kirbopher2004 (talk) 10:18, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am thankful for your support. Don't be a stranger if you need my help or see something which I can impact positively. BusterD (talk) 21:14, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do I even remember participating in that Kirbopher2004 (talk) 21:32, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well you did. I appreciate your coming down on my side. Please remember to sign your posts...  ;-) BusterD (talk) 21:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok then Kirbopher2004 (talk) 21:46, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've spoken with you about this twice before (#Steven Spielberg and #Stop reverting edits without explanation), and have made it clear to you that when reverting another editor's edit, you should include an edit summary. This edit did have some issues, namely that it cited IMDb, which is not a reliable source, but that still doesn't mean that you can revert it without saying why. The second cited source, an interview, does support most of what the IP editor added, so I don't see why the whole addition needed to be removed.

This is your final warning. If you again remove valid content without an explanation, I will have to refer this to an administrator. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 19:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Right you know what you can leave my feed Kirbopher2004 (talk) 20:12, 13 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

Sorry, my error. I misread that. DonQuixote (talk) 23:01, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What was the error Kirbopher2004 (talk) 00:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks but no thanks Kirbopher2004 (talk) 04:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fantastic Mr. Fox (film), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 21:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well I have no idea where to find a source since you Americans cover things more then us Australian folks because Disney plus AUS is aligned with Disney plus UK and there isn’t many articles that I know of that cover Disney plus UK news Kirbopher2004 (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry to hear that, but our verifiability policies require sources for information such as this. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 04:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Kirbopher2004,

At Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Modussiccandi, you appear to have !voted twice: [1][2]. Could you please strike one of these !votes, since only one is permitted per RFA?

Thanks,

GAB^gab 00:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok then was just being fair minded Kirbopher2004 (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What exactly is a !vote like this aimed at accomplishing? valereee (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are we still on that because I said to the previous person that called me out on doing two votes that I was just being fair minded Kirbopher2004 (talk) 21:46, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm trying to be generous here but both that "fair minded" comment and this one look like trolling. valereee (talk) 21:57, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~)).  valereee (talk) 21:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]