Hey TrickyH, you recently edited Highway 60 (Israel). Your edit leaves out an important fact. You say "...between Israeli settlements and the city of Hebron...". In fact, (unlike Highway 443 which was closed for many years to green license plates) Highway 60 is shared by both Israeli yellow license plates and Palestinian green license plates (usually courteously). So the road connects both Israeli settlements and Palestinian towns.

Moreover, you placed your edit in a paragraph describing the road's physicalities. There is an entire section where I think your point would better fit and even be expanded upon. The section "Bypass roads" (and this section's name could be changed) would be a place to discuss political issues. For example, further north, in the Samarian Mountains, there are frequent road closures. Closures do occur in the southern Judean Mountain section of the highway, but considerably less by far. (I think by a ratio of about 10:1) (need refs)

I am considering rewriting your edit and placing it in the paragraph dealing with political issues, unless you beat me to it. (I'm kind of busy for a while.) I look forward to discussing this option further with you. --@Efrat (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Efrat, I have revised my edit to make it clear that the highway services Palestinian communities such as Hebron as well as the Israeli settlements of the southern West Bank. I feel that this sentence should remain in the current section, as it describes the highway's route through the southern West Bank via Israeli settlements and the cities of Hebron and Bethlehem. You are correct in stating that the road is open to Palestinian vehicles; however, there are other issues such as the placement and access to junctions that restrict the movement of green-plated vehicles which could be expanded in the Bypass roads section. --@TrickyH (talk)

Your edit gives true information, but to be consistant, all the information must be given. Now, the following 2 sentences after your edit need to be reworked. ie. Once entering J'lem, the road only serves yellow plates. Then, north of J'lem, the situation reverts to that of the south (as, shown by your edit) until Jenin where the route is restricted to only green plates (and is not even officialy Route 60 pending final status agreements as detailed in the "Junctions" list), and finally at its northern limits to only yellow plates. Further more, all along the route, access at various junctions with Palestinian towns and Israeli settlements involve various restrictions and permissions.

I'm sure you will see, that at some point in the future, this entire discussion will grow to become a seperate paragraph immedately following a purely geographical discription of the route. Now that I think of it, why has no one ever written an entire article about Bypass Roads in the West Bank? And while we are at it, maybe something should be said about the economic cooperation between many Settlers and Palestinians in the West Bank (which in part is facilitated by the existance of shared bypass roads). It will be interesting to see how this develops. It seems that a simple article about a simple stretch of pavement may lead to discussions about many other issues! --@Efrat (talk) 06:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please be aware that all articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict 'broadly construed' (WP:ARBPIA) are covered by editing restrictions. The restrictions are described in the 'WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES' section on article talk pages such as Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions and include WP:1RR. You should be aware of WP:BRD too if you aren't already familiar with it. It is easy to trigger edit warring in the ARBPIA topic area because there are many advocates and nationalists. Sean.hoyland - talk 08:51, 14 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi TrickyH. Regarding your edits at Resistance (socialist youth organisation), firstly you added some sources from the official Resistance website. As you can see from the reference list in the article, 18 of the 22 references in the article currently come from either the Resistance official website, or Green Left Weekly and their youtube channel. Please read WP:PRIMARY. "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources..." The fact that this article has to rely so heavily on sources from it's own official publications gives the impression to the reader that Resistance cannot get much support or news coverage from outside its own sources; it's certainly not helping the article in any way. It would be a great benefit to the article if at least some, if not most, of those primary sources could be replaced with secondary ones.

The second problem I immediately see at this articles is all the references are bare URLs. Please read Template:Cite web and start formatting references using that template. As well as looking a lot tidier, formatting references this way helps to prevent link rot, as when a date, article title and author are specified it is considerable easier to search for where the url has moved to, or to find a mirror of it. If you are unsure of how to do this, here is an example: [1]. Freikorp (talk) 13:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, I'll look into secondary sources to further expand the article and reformat the references!

I have created a new section for Extrajudicial killings. Self revert your edits which violate revert rules. If not, I will report you. If there's an objection from two users on your sources, you should bring it to the talk page and not revert their edits. Among the things I removed, were things that are not in the right location of the article, suggestion unsourced claims, like for example that the death of alldged Palestinian assailent in 22 September was followed by an esculation but acually, the esculation occured in 1 October and sources in the article agree with that. So self revert your edits or be reported for breaking rules.

If you did not know, articles related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have a revert protection, users are restricted to 1 revert per 24 hours in those articles.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Even if Bolter were my twin brother and did say exactly what I thought (not the case), if someone takes such a tone (and violates the English language with such stubborn persistence), better ignore.Arminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a bit funny to write about an as yet non-existent state, but I do appreciate your effort and joined in a bit. If only it would lead to a few users & editors taking a less one-sided stance... But I'm afraid it won't. Anyhow, I'm quite sure that the temperature tables need fixing. It is factually wrong to state that Jerusalem (7-800 metres above sea level) has higher average temp. in July-August than Jericho (some -400 m) and Gaza (Med coast, 0 m). Either the source is flawed, or maybe you combined several sources? Don't believe me, just check for instance similar data from Israeli sources on, say, West Jlm, En Boqeq and Tel Aviv. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 23:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, didn't notice that Jlm is the only one to have an additional line, "record high" or alike. I was comparing pears with apples. It still might happen to others, too, and the sources are indeed mixed, but there's nothing factually wrong there, sorry.Arminden (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2016 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries! I didn't add the data for Gaza, but Jericho and Jerusalem were copy+paste jobs. I welcome further contributions, there's lots more to add and I just wanted to get the page started with some substance. TrickyH (talk) 07:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FYI, I opened a discussion about the importance of Palestinian wine for the Palestine project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palestine#Palestinian_wine. In addition, I would like to refer you to WP:BRD, which says, in simple words, that when reverted you should discuss first, and not simply repeat your edit. Debresser (talk) 16:53, 6 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your ratings of both Nuaman and Muhammad Najati Sidqi are quite unfocused. There is no way in the wide world that the grading criteria 'Start' can be applied to either article. You are sequentially downgrading their quality. Get a third opinion when in doubt. Nishidani (talk) 21:23, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Nishidani, I didn't rate either article on the quality scale. I'm working my way through the "Start" class articles with no "Importance" rating and focusing almost entirely on that, for the moment. You're right - I thought Nuaman was probably more of a C class as I read it over, but I didn't want to take too much initiative...TrickyH (talk) 21:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fine. But look at format uniformity, design, sourcing quality, links, etc, I never drive any article I mainly write towards some grading like GA, but if I do articles like those two, you can be assured I scraped the barrel of what is available concerning those topics, and the sourcing will be exhaustive, linked and of high quality throughout. By this, I don't mean to get you to alter your opinion. But the grading, if one clicks to the relevant information about what 'start' class means, is wildly off the mark. Regards. Nishidani (talk) 21:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries, I'll have a re-read and work on the quality too! TrickyH (talk) 21:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Noha Khalef requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:15, 4 December 2017 (UTC) /Newsletter/Send&oldid=9976074Reply[reply]

The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• BennyOnTheLoose, with 746 points, a tally built both on snooker and other sports topics, and on more general subjects.
• Bloom6132, with 683 points, garnered mostly from "In the news" items and related DYKs.
• Sammi Brie, with 527, from a variety of submissions related to radio and television stations.

Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article nomination, 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. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. WikiCup judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

At this stage, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; 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 the remaining competitors, 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, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!

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 yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is

• Lee Vilenski (1752 points), who won in 2020 and was runner up in both 2019 and last year. In the final round he achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on cue sports. He was closely followed by
• Bloom6132 (1732), who specialised in "In the news" items and DYKs, and who has reached the final round of the Cup for the past three years. Next was
• BennyOnTheLoose (1238), another cue sports enthusiast, also interested in songs, followed by
• Muboshgu (1082), an "In the news" contributor, a seasoned contestant who first took part in the Cup ten years ago. Other finalists were
• Sammi Brie (930), who scored with a featured article, good articles and DYKs on TV and radio stations,
• Kavyansh.Singh (370), who created various articles on famous Americans, including an FA on Louis H. Bean, famed for his prediction of election outcomes. Next was
• PCN02WPS (292), who scored with good articles and DYKs on sporting and other topics and
• Z1720 (25) who had DYKs on various topics including historic Canadians.

During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or the overall leader in this field.

• Lee Vilenski wins the featured article prize, for a total of 6 FAs during the course of the competition and 3 in the final round.
• Kavyansh.Singh wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 2.
• Adam Cuerden wins the featured picture prize, for 39 FPs during the competition.
• Z1720 wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 35 FARs in round 4.
• Epicgenius wins the good article prize, for 32 GAs in round 1.
• SounderBruce wins the featured topic prize, for 4 FT articles in round 1.
• Lee Vilenski wins the good topic prize, for 34 GT articles in round 5.
• Sammi Brie wins the good article reviewer prize, for 71 GARs overall.
• Sammi Brie wins the Did you know prize, for 30 DYKs in round 3 and 106 overall.
• Bloom6132 wins the In the news prize, for 106 ITNs in round 5 and 289 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, 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) 19:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 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 ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or 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) 14:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
• Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
• FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
• TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
• Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. 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.

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 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:

• Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
• Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
• Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
• BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
• FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.

Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie, Thebiguglyalien, MyCatIsAChonk, PCN02WPS, and AirshipJungleman29.

So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Thebiguglyalien, with 919 points from a featured article on Frances Cleveland as well as five good articles and many reviews,
• Unlimitedlead, with 862 points from a high-scoring featured articles on Henry II of England and numerous reviews,
• Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.

Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
• Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
• Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

• BeanieFan11 with 2582 points
• Thebiguglyalien with 1615 points
• Epicgenius with 1518 points
• MyCatIsAChonk with 1012 points
• BennyOnTheLoose with 974 points
• AirshipJungleman29 with 673 points
• Sammi Brie with 520 points
• Unlimitedlead with 5 points

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 competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. 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.

• Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
• Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
• BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
• LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
• MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
• Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
• Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (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) 16:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 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 ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 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: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), and Frostly (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]