User talk:Guettarda/Archive 22
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Guettarda. 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 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup!
Hello and Happy New Year!
Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. 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 make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).
- There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:
- G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
- R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
- G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.
- The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
- Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.
- Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
- At least 8 characters in length
- Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
- Different from their username
- User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
- Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
- {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.
- Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, SilkTork.
- Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
- Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Nomination of Rex Lassalle for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rex Lassalle 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/Rex Lassalle until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Rathfelder (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- As it stands it looks like advertising. Rathfelder (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Rathfelder: - I cut the spammy stuff, added scholarly sources and a profile in a leading national newspaper. Haven't had time to do more, nor do I have access to a library that has any depth of coverage of the topic. Guettarda (talk) 06:40, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Sanctions for off-wiki writing
Hi, without wishing to derail that conversation any further (because this isn't really relevant to it), there are a number of globally blocked editors who have been sanctioned for opinions expressed off wiki - an example would be some who have spoken or run websites that support child pornography or paedophilia. Black Kite (talk) 12:36, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. It's rather different a universe than what I was thinking about, but I understand what you mean now. Thanks for following up. Guettarda (talk) 13:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Company Accounts
Dear Guettarda,
since you're my favourite admin, please allow me to ask you a question about the local system of rules: How does en.WP handle paid editing in form of copmpany accounts writing articles? I'm a mentor at de.WP and have a mentee who's working for the PR department of a company and has rewritten the article about her company. She did good work, keeping the NPOV and providing good, notable sources. In es.WP she wouldn't have had a chance as commercial authors get blocked and all their edits are reverted. What's the policy in en.WP? If that topic is beyond your scope, where could I look that up?
Thanks and kind regards, Grueslayer 21:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Grueslayer: There are two issues I'm aware of: paid editing and conflict of interest. en.WP has no specific policies on paid editing, only the Foundation requirement that paid editors disclose their editing. In practice, undisclosed paid editors are usually blocked, and their edits are frequently reverted. When it comes to COI, it's best to disclose any potential conflicts.
- There's also a somewhat helpful essay Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations; I think the short version is it's best not to edit Wikipedia articles directly. Draft the content on the talk page or in a sandbox and ask an editor to make the edits for you. New articles by paid editors should also go through Articles for Creation. As long as someone isn't adding promotional content, and their edits are obviously aimed at improving the encyclopaedia, I think there will always be people willing to help out.
- If I've gotten anything wrong, hopefully someone will chime in. Guettarda (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, that helps a lot! Kind regards, Grueslayer 22:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
2019
Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda Arendt, and Happy 2019 to you as well! Guettarda (talk) 14:55, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Facts About Myers not allowed?
[Deleted, per WP:BLP - Guettarda (talk)--Apemonkey1 (talk) 04:02, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- You can't accuse people of criminal acts on Wikipedia without solid supporting citations. Read the policy page, it's all there - WP:BLP. Guettarda (talk) 04:48, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- It isn't about what PZ did - you can say "Why is the fact that he [x] not reported in this article." Obviously, you need to back that up with reliable sources; you can't expect other people to track down sources for you.
- What you can't make a statement that what Myer did constituted wrongdoing. You especially can't do that when, iirc, the civil suit against him was either dropped or thrown out. Guettarda (talk) 05:03, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
What lawsuit are you referring to? So what was wrong with the last item about improving the article? (I removed the part you complained about before.) Who do you say I accused of committing a crime? As I did not! (You should really read things properly before replying so you dont make such mistakes in future!) So its not wrong to accuse a person of rape without any evidence! ah ok thanks for that info! Bet if I did that to you tho, it would be wrong right?--Apemonkey1 (talk) 05:58, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Who do you say I accused of committing a crime? As I did not!
You accused him of committing slander, which is a crime. Even if it wasn't, it's an accusation of wrongdoing, so without supporting sources it's a violation of the WP:BLP policy. You also repeated the allegations he made, which is also a problem because that spreads the accusation far wider than a blog post ever would (even talk pages on Wikipedia get a whole lot of traffic).- You can discuss how to use reliable sources to include this information in the article. I'm not sure this would be the wisest thing though, since it probably draws more attention to the claims. Whatever you do, you need to discuss this in terms of what reliable sources say. Guettarda (talk) 14:51, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, got my wires crossed on the lawsuit thing. It was threatened, but never actually filed. Guettarda (talk) 15:01, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).
Interface administrator changes
- A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
- Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
- A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.
- A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.
- Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.
DYK for Sabinaria
On 7 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sabinaria, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when taxonomist Gloria Galeano first saw pictures of the newly discovered Sabinaria magnifica she described it as "the most beautiful of all Colombian palms"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sabinaria. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sabinaria), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
WikiCup 2019 Reminder
Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you have signed up to compete in this year's WikiCup! There are about 2 weeks left before the first round ends – if you haven't yet made your first submission, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sabinaria you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 10:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The article Sabinaria you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sabinaria for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The article Sabinaria you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sabinaria for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
WikiCup 2019 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.
Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
- L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
- Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
- MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
- Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
- Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
- Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).
Administrators' newsletter – March 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
- Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.
- A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.
- The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
- paid-en-wp wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
- checkuser-en-wp wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.
- The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
- Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.
DYK nomination of Main Ridge, Tobago
Hello! Your submission of Main Ridge, Tobago at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SounderBruce 06:58, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Main Ridge, Tobago
On 21 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Main Ridge, Tobago, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tobago's Main Ridge is one of the oldest protected areas in the world set aside for conservation, having been created by the British Parliament in 1776? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Main Ridge, Tobago. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Main Ridge, Tobago), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
About your comment
I saw your comment at [1], and to a degree it is a moving statement. I understand that people and links opposed to your existence are worrisome. But to me, it seems like racists have been very solidly defeated, and censorship is a counterproductive practice that risks bringing them back from the dead. By contrast, some of us are more prone to notice other things that are still ongoing right now [2][3]. Note the map in that article. There are more than a billion people who have copies of what you may or may not dare to choose to call hate propaganda that inspires things like that. The authorities of the world do not put people in jail for ten years for possessing it, or censor links to it, and with that I also agree, in the same narrow sense as you accepted my position at ANI. I think that where any wrong belief is concerned, the best progress can be made by leaving it out in the open for all to see and think about, in the hope that human beings are capable, by thought and introspection, of choosing what is right above what is wrong. If I am confident in the ability of people to overcome error by reason, then I must attribute the tenacity of wrong beliefs throughout the world to other methods which prohibit the application of reason. Wnt (talk) 09:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Coccothrinax jimenezii
On 4 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coccothrinax jimenezii, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Coccothrinax jimenezii, a palm tree native to the island of Hispaniola, was listed as a critically endangered species within two years of its formal description? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coccothrinax jimenezii. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coccothrinax jimenezii), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Granting accountcreator
Hi there! Just as a heads-up, I noticed you granted accountcreator to Jami430 the other day - I've now revoked that as Jami430 is not active at WP:ACC, but I've also granted them eventcoordinator, which grants similar rights to accountcreator. This does not include the ability to override AntiSpoof or the title blacklist, and also includes the ability to grant confirmed to users. Cheers! stwalkerster (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Stwalkerster, that's what I meant to do, but when I scanned the list of userrights, I picked the older and more familiar option. Thanks for fixing that. Guettarda (talk) 14:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.
- The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.
- Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
- As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
DYK for Coccothrinax jamaicensis
On 9 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Coccothrinax jamaicensis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while the fan palm Coccothrinax jamaicensis is the only Coccothrinax species native to Jamaica, the neighbouring island of Cuba has 39 native species? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coccothrinax jamaicensis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Coccothrinax jamaicensis), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
DYK for History of Tobago
On 12 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article History of Tobago, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/History of Tobago. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, History of Tobago), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
it's cancer
I don't see how your edit here doesn't violate WP:REFACTOR. Thewolfchild's comment was not "off-topic, uncivil, unclear, or otherwise distracting material"
and (to my knowledge) we don't require medical certification for talk page conversations. Maybe you overstepped and you should just revert yourself. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:16, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback, but practicing medicine without a license is against the law. Trying to scare newbies is (at the very least) a violation of CIVIL. Guettarda (talk) 13:34, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Other stuff aside, with out without off-wiki qualifications, nobody on Wikipedia should be giving medical advice. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Chris troutman: Not to mention that at least three of my cats in my lifetime have done exactly the same thing. So that advice was complete fuckwittery - and I have warned them on their talkpage that if they do that again they'll be indeffed. Black Kite (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Main Ridge, Tobago
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Main Ridge, Tobago you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk) 19:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Stella Abidh
Hello! Your submission of Stella Abidh at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
WikiCup 2019 Reminder
Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 2 of this year's WikiCup! There are only a few days until the second round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 05:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)
Unsourced additions
Hi, regarding what you wrote to me about my unsourced additions to Geography of Trinidad and Tobago, I based them a lot upon this file: "File:Koppen-Geiger Map Caribbean present.svg". I figured it is from Wikimedia, and when I looked at the summary and how many authors had worked on it, and also the fact that it was broken down to a 1-km resolution, it seemed very reliable. When I looked at the part of the map that depicted Trinidad and Tobago it was essentially 50%-50% tropical rainforest and tropical monsoon climates, with isolated pockets of tropical savanna, and that's where I drew those conclusions from. How should I properly reference that? I am curious, I want to contribute to Wikipedia, but do so in a reliable way.
When it comes to my addition of the climate table in the San Fernando article, I truly did look for more reliable data, but there was very little to find about the town, which makes sense since it is not very big. I did find a few more, but none seemed more reliable than the next. One of them was Meteoblue, but in my past experience with that website they always severely understate the precipitation levels of most tropical places at least, and almost all other sources point to a much wetter climate than their website would suggest. Anyways, with Climate-data.org, I just figured the data seemed in line with other nearby towns that data existed on, and also the file I previously mentioned.
Thanks in advance for your help. Timothy2b (talk) 17:49, 26 April 2019 (CET)
- @Timothy2b: Per WP:USERGENERATED, user-generated sources, including Wikipedia, are regarded as generally not reliable sources, so we cannot use Wikipedia as a source in Wikipedia. - Donald Albury 19:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks Donald Albury. Guettarda (talk) 22:19, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Timothy2b: With regards to the Climate-data.org, they don't explain where their data comes from, so that's a big problem. In addition, a site needs some external evidence of reliability - for example, some evidence that it was connected with some major research institution, or that the people behind it were recognised experts. In this case, the person behind the website (per this) appears to be this person, who lists their profession as "Digital Marketing Expert". I can't see how this meets our reliable sources policy.
- As for the map, reading a map that's that tiny and extrapolating Trinidad's climate from it is unreliable. In addition, I'm curious about your conclusion that it has a tropical monsoon climate. While Wikipedia is not a reliable source, if the Köppen climate classification article is correct, nowhere in Trinidad has a monsoon climate - the trade winds blow reliably from the northeast.
- In short, we need reliable sources that say the thing we're adding to Wikipedia. Not sources that say things that we can extrapolate are probably true. So please fix your additions - either add a source, or remove them. Guettarda (talk) 22:47, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Guettarda: I see what you mean. Regarding your questioning of my reasoning of why parts of Trinidad have a monsoon climate, sure it does not say in the Köppen climate article that it does, but nowhere does it say that it does not. Also trade winds reliably blowing from the northeast does not mean it cannot have such a climate. If you look at the article about the tropical monsoon climate and what defines it, there is simply a formula for rainfall and the general tropical standard that all months have mean temperatures above 18°C. You can also find this in a lot of places if you Google it. So that the trade winds blow from the northeast is not evidence against what I wrote. But again, I based it on the map and I used Climate-data.org, my bad. I have tried to find data from NOAA, Deutscher Wetterdienst, World Meteorological Organization, among other climate data collectors, but I do not know how to access their data. I have seen other climate tables use them as sources, and those are reliable data collectors. I would like to at least find out if it is possible access that data before I remove my additions, but if I am not able to or the data shows otherwise, of course I will remove or edit my additions. Would you happen to know how to do that? I want to have reliable sources. Please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy2b (talk • contribs)
- @Guettarda: Hi, just wanted to let you know that I found historical climate data on San Fernando from The World Bank Group, more specifically a page on their website about climate change and historical climatic data. It was possible to select countries, and for Trinidad and Tobago they had cooperated with four sources, including universities. This allowed them to create an interactive map (sort of, hard to describe) where one could choose location and get data from that area. I zoomed in and clicked on San Fernando, which gave me the data for that area (the website gave data for those coordinates). I made the edits on the San Fernando article, and referenced it properly. By the Köppen climate classification system, the climate did indeed fall under tropical monsoon. Tomorrow I will try my best to find information on Trinidad and Tobago as a whole, and if I don't I'll remove my additions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy2b (talk • contribs)
- @Guettarda: I have now cited all my additions to information I found on reliable websites, including the World Bank Group, as I mentioned earlier, and NASA, among others, for the other articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy2b (talk • contribs)
- @Timothy2b: I checked all the sources, and none of them supported the claims you added. The source you added to the geography of Trinidad and Tobago and Trinidad and Tobago articles had maps on urban land-use, and none of them were of TT. The link you added to the San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago article had some data for the country as a whole, but said nothing about San Fernando, and did not have the data you added to the page. It's one thing to add uncited claims, or to use unreliable sources, but adding fake sources, as you seem to be doing here, is a big problem.
- And please sign your talk page comments with four tildes, which will produce a signature. Guettarda (talk) 20:26, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Guettarda: I just double-checked the link to the World Bank Group source, and it turns out it directed to the wrong place. I will try to fix that. If you go to the link, then country, the TT, then Climate Data you will find what I am referring to. As for the NASA thing, you have to add the tags "Climate" and "South America". I will try to improve that so as the link brings the user directly to the map I used. I did not make these things up as you claim, I will try to make the links work the way I thought they did.
- @Guettarda: I think I fixed the link for the San Fernando data, it works for me now at least. Let me know if it does not for you, because then there is something wrong. I swear on my life the data is there, I am not lying. I edited the San Fernando page so it says the data is for the San Fernando area, as opposed to the actual city, as it appears the data is for that part of TT rather than the city itself. Only the area close to the city has this data, and when you click farther north, other data appears, meaning it is for that general area. Since it isn't necessarily from the city itself, I specified that, so now one could say it's more of a pointer to the climate of the area. Just so you are aware, in order for the data to appear, one must select the TT page from the list of countries available on the website, and then click on San Fernando (or the area around it) on the map available. The data should then appear to the left of the map. I hope this works, and that you will find I did not make these things up.
As for the Climate additions to the TT and Geography of TT, I revisited the map I looked at, and I was mistaken. I mistook the color for tropical monsoon climate for grey, so I was incorrect. I apologize. I removed everything I wrote on both those articles. Timothy2b (talk) 22:47, 28 April 2019 (CET)
Thanks for sorting out the University of connecticut AfD
I appreciate your advice. I hope I didn't upset the student. Logophile59 (talk) 20:48, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Stella Abidh
On 30 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Stella Abidh, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Stella Abidh is believed to be the first Indo-Trinidadian woman to become a medical doctor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stella Abidh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Stella Abidh), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Your GA nomination of Main Ridge, Tobago
The article Main Ridge, Tobago you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Main Ridge, Tobago for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk) 13:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
WikiCup 2019 May newsletter
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:
- Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
- Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
- Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
- Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.
Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, Ceranthor, Lee Vilenski, and Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
HI! 👋🏽
@Guettarda: a very short message to say hello. Again! Great speaking to you earlier. MassiveEartha (talk) 12:46, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- @MassiveEartha: Great meeting you! Guettarda (talk) 13:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Guettarda: as discussed Digital Library of the Caribbean MassiveEartha (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 special circular
Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
- A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
- Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.
- XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.
- In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases,
the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions
; administrators found failing to have adequately done sowill not be resysopped automatically
. All current administrators have been notified of this change. - Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.
- In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases,
- A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
- A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.
WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter
- April 2019—Issue 001
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Tree of Life newsletter!
Sturgeon nominated by Atsme, reviewed by Chiswick Chap |
Cretoxyrhina nominated by Macrophyseter |
- WikiCup heating up
Tree of Life editors are making a respectable showing in this year's WikiCup, with three regular editors advancing to the third round. Overall winner from 2016, Casliber, topped the scoreboard in points for round 2, getting a nice bonus for bringing Black mamba to FA. Enwebb continues to favor things remotely related to bats, bringing Stellaluna to GA. Plants editor Guettarda also advanced to round 3 with several plant-related DYKs.
- Wikipedia page views track animal migrations, flowers blooming
A March 2019 paper in PLOS Biology found that Wikipedia page views vary seasonally for species. With a dataset of 31,751 articles about species, the authors found that roughly a quarter of all articles had significant seasonal variations in page views on at least one language version of Wikipedia. They examined 245 language versions. Page views also peaked with cultural events, such as views of the Great white shark article during Shark Week or Turkey during Thanksgiving.
- Did you know ... that Tree of Life editors bring content to the front page nearly every day?
* ... that Dippy is the most famous dinosaur skeleton in the world? (1 April)
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
DYK for Ismith Khan
On 20 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ismith Khan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that novelist Ismith Khan's relative obscurity may reflect the fact that he was not based in London, the "literary capital" of the English Caribbean? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ismith Khan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ismith Khan), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Biotemperature is the arithmetic mean of all temperatures (including those adjusted to 0°C)
Hello,
"It is measured as the mean of all temperatures above freezing, with all temperatures below freezing and above 30 °C adjusted to 0 °C"
This assertion about biotemperature is wrong.
"Mean of all temperatures above freezing" means that temperatures below freezing aren't taken into account in the arithmetic mean whereas it is the case in the calculation of the biotemperature.
Imagine that, by simplification, the annual biotemperature is estimated as the mean of mean monthly temperatures. Let's say that 2 months have negative mean temperatures and 10 months have positive mean temperatures. The two negative temperatures will be adjusted to 0°C and the biotemperature will be equal to the sum of the 10 positive temperatures divided not by 10 as "Mean of all temperatures above freezing" suggests but by 12 with 12 being the number of all the monthly temperatures including the 2 negative monthly temperatures.
Biotemperature is the arithmetic "mean of all the temperatures (adjusted to °C or not)" and not the arithmetic "mean of all temperatures above freezing".
This is why I reverted your edit. Carlo Colussi (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Carlo Colussi: The wording was unclear, and I thank you for trying to fix that. I'm familiar with biotemperature - I've dissected Holdridge's Life Zone Ecology, discussed the merits of biotemperature with the author of the cited source, I've done biotemperature calculations. Please try to assume good faith - after all, it is Wikipedia policy - and don't assume that the people you deal with here are stupid or ignorant like you have here.
- I removed your parenthetical comment because it makes the sentence less clear and harder to read. Guettarda (talk) 20:23, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
I still think that originally the phrase "Mean of all temperatures above freezing" was wrong because it strongly suggests that the denominator enumerates only the strictly positive and under 30°C temperatures and not, as it shall, all the temperatures.
I don't think that people are stupid or ignorant but I think that Wikipedia shall make the reader understand as much as possible and that sentence was "clearly" "unclear". If someone has never heard of biotemperature it is very important to make him understand how to estimate it and the original phrase couldn't let it at all. This is why I gave you an example to make clear that the mean applied to all temperatures, even those corrected. I still think this is possibly the most important thing to say in this article : to explain the difference between temperature and biotemperature. An article in Wikipedia is supposed to bring new knowledge but it wasn't the case with this sentence which was completely misleading.--Carlo Colussi (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
May 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- May 2019—Issue 002
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Cretoxyrhina by Macrophyseter |
Spinophorosaurus by FunkMonk/Jens Lallensack |
- Fundamental changes being discussed at WikiProject Biology
On 23 May, user Prometheus720 created a talk page post, "Revamp of Wikiproject Biology--Who is In?". In the days since, WP:BIOL has been bustling with activity, with over a dozen editors weighing in on this discussion, as well as several others that have subsequently spawned. An undercurrent of thought is that WP:BIOL has too many subprojects, preventing editors from easily interacting and stopping a "critical mass" of collaboration and engagement. Many mergers and consolidations of subprojects have been tentatively listed, with a consolidation of WikiProjects Genetics Molecular and Cell Biology Computational Biology Biophysics currently in discussion. Other ideas being aired include updating old participants lists, redesigning project pages to make them more user-friendly, and clearly identifying long- and short-term goals.
- Editor Spotlight: These editors want you to write about dinosaurs
Editors FunkMonk and Jens Lallensack had a very fruitful month, collaborating to bring two dinosaur articles to GA and then nominating them both for FA. They graciously decided to answer some questions for the first ToL Editor Spotlight, giving insight to their successful collaborations, explaining why you should collaborate with them, and also sharing some tidbits about their lives off-Wikipedia.
1) Enwebb: How long have you two been collaborating on articles?
- Jens Lallensack: I started in the German Wikipedia in 2005 but switched to the English Wikipedia because of its very active dinosaur project. My first major collaboration with FunkMonk was on Heterodontosaurus in 2015.
- FunkMonk: Yeah, we had interacted already on talk pages and through reviewing each other's articles, and at some point I was thinking of expanding Heterodontosaurus, and realised Jens had already written the German Wikipedia version, so it seemed natural to work together on the English one. Our latest collaboration was Spinophorosaurus, where by another coincidence, I had wanted to work on that article for the WP:Four Award, and it turned out that Jens had a German book about the expedition that found the dinosaur, which I wouldn't have been able to utilise with my meagre German skills. Between those, we also worked on Brachiosaurus, a wider Dinosaur Project collaboration between several editors.
2) Enwebb: Why dinosaurs?
- JL: Because of the huge public interest in them. But dinosaurs are also highly interesting from a scientific point of view: key evolutionary innovations emerged within this group, such as warm-bloodedness, gigantism, and flight. Dinosaur research is, together with the study of fossil human remains, the most active field in paleontology. New scientific techniques and approaches tend to get developed within this field. Dinosaur research became increasingly interdisciplinary, and now does not only rely on various fields of biology and geology, but also on chemistry and physics, among others. Dinosaurs are therefore ideal to convey scientific methodology to the general public.
- FM: As outlined above, dinosaurs have been described as a "gateway to science"; if you learn about dinosaurs, you will most likely also learn about a lot of scientific fields you would not necessarily be exposed to otherwise. On a more personal level, having grown up with and being influenced by various dinosaur media, it feels pretty cool to help spread knowledge about these animals, closest we can get to keeping them alive.
3) Enwebb: Why should other editors join you in writing articles related to paleontology? Are you looking to attract new editors, or draw in experienced editors from other areas of Wikipedia?
- JL: Because we are a small but active and helpful community. Our Dinosaur collaboration, one of the very few active open collaborations in Wikipedia, makes high-level writing on important articles easier and more fun. Our collaboration is especially open to editors without prior experience in high-level writing. But we do not only write articles: several WikiProject Dinosaur participants are artists who do a great job illustrating the articles, and maintain an extensive and very active image review system. In fact, a number of later authors started with contributing images.
- FM: Anyone who is interested in palaeontology is welcome to try writing articles, and we would be more than willing to help. I find that the more people that work on articles simultaneously with me, the more motivation I get to write myself. I am also one of those editors who started out contributing dinosaur illustrations and making minor edits, and only began writing after some years. But when I got to it, it wasn't as intimidating as I had feared, and I've learned a lot in the process. For example anatomy; if you know dinosaur anatomy, you have a very good framework for understanding the anatomy of other tetrapod animals, including humans.
4) Enwebb: Between the two of you, you have over 300 GA reviews. FunkMonk, you have over 250 of those. What keeps you coming back to review more articles?
- FM: One of the main reasons I review GANs is to learn more about subjects that seem interesting (or which I would perhaps not come across otherwise). There are of course also more practical reasons, such as helping an article on its way towards FAC, to reduce the GAN backlog, and to "pay back" when I have a nomination up myself. It feels like a win-win situation where I can be entertained by interesting info, while also helping other editors get their nominations in shape, and we'll end up with an article that hopefully serves to educate a lot of people (the greater good).
- JL: Because I enjoy reading Wikipedia articles and like to learn new things. In addition, reviews give me the opportunity to have direct contact with the authors, and help them to make their articles even better. This is quite rewarding for me personally. But I also review because I consider our GA and FA system to be of fundamental importance for Wikipedia. When I started editing Wikipedia (the German version), the article promotion reviews motivated me and improved my writing skills a lot. Submitting an article for review requires one to get serious and take additional steps to bring the article to the best quality possible. GAs and FAs are also a good starting point for readers, and may motivate them to become authors themselves.
5) Enwebb: What are your editing preferences? Any scripts or gadgets you find invaluable?
- FM: One script that everyone should know about is the duplink highlight tool. It will show duplinks within the intro and body of a given article separately, and it seems a lot of people still don't know about it, though they are happy when introduced to it. I really liked the citationbot too (since citation consistency is a boring chore to me), but it seems to be blocked at the moment due to some technical issues.
- JL: I often review using the Wikipedia Beta app on my smartphone, as it allows me to read without needing to sit in front of the PC. For writing, I find the reference management software Zotero invaluable, as it generates citation templates automatically, saving a lot of time.
- Editor's note: I downloaded Zotero and tried it for the first time and think it is a very useful tool. More here.
6) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-wiki?
- FM: Perhaps that I have no background in natural history/science, but work with animation and games. But fascination with and knowledge of nature and animals is actually very helpful when designing and animating characters and creatures, so it isn't that far off, and I can actually use some of the things I learn while writing here for my work (when I wrote the Dromaeosauroides article, it was partially to learn more about the animal for a design-school project).
- JL: That I am actually doing research on dinosaurs. Though I avoid writing about topics I publish research on, my Wikipedia work helps me to keep a good general overview over the field, and quite regularly I can use what I learned while writing for Wikipedia for my research.
Get in touch with these editors regarding collaboration at WikiProject Dinosaurs!
- Marine life continues to dominate ToL DYKs
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
- Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický
- An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
- An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
- An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.
- The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
- Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.
- The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
- The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.
WikiCup 2019 Reminder
Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you are a current participant in round 3 of this year's WikiCup! There are just over 2 weeks until the third round ends – if you haven't made you first submission for this round yet, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 19:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)
A barnstar for you!
The Brilliant Insight Barnstar | |
Thank you for this, [4], Guettarda, it's the most insightful thing I've read in recent memory, and it's also remarkably simple. starship.paint (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC) |
- Thanks you Starship.paint. Guettarda (talk) 13:53, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks
I have just read at User talk:Katherine (WMF) the message originally written by you at Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram in this edit, but copied to Katherine's talk page by Seraphimblade. It says things which for years I have been convinced are obviously true, but which in my experience most people don't see at all. Thanks for attempting to spread an understanding of those important points. (Whether the attempt succeeds or not is another matter.) JamesBWatson (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for this - Guettarda (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).
- 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
- 1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
- 2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
|
|
- A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.
- In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.
- The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
- The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
- A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.
- In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.
- That's a sad read. Guettarda (talk) 23:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
WikiCup 2019 July newsletter
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
- Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
- Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
- SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
- Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics
Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 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, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! 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. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
June 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- June 2019—Issue 003
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Masked booby by Casliber and Aa77zz, reviewed by Jens Lallensack |
Masked booby by Casliber |
Project name | Relative WikiWork |
---|---|
Cats | 4.79
|
Fisheries and fishing | 4.9
|
Dogs | 4.91
|
Viruses | 4.91
|
ToL | 4.94
|
Cetaceans | 4.97
|
Primates | 4.98
|
Sharks | 5.04
|
All wikiprojects average | 5.05
|
Dinosaurs | 5.12
|
Equine | 5.15
|
Bats | 5.25
|
Mammals | 5.32
|
Aquarium fishes | 5.35
|
Hypericaceae | 5.38
|
Turtles | 5.4
|
Birds | 5.46
|
Australian biota | 5.5
|
Marine life | 5.54
|
Animals | 5.56
|
Paleontology | 5.57
|
Rodents | 5.58
|
Amphibians and Reptiles | 5.64
|
Fungi | 5.65
|
Bivalves | 5.66
|
Plants | 5.67
|
Algae | 5.68
|
Arthropods | 5.69
|
Hymenoptera | 5.72
|
Microbiology | 5.72
|
Cephalopods | 5.74
|
Fishes | 5.76
|
Ants | 5.79
|
Gastropods | 5.8
|
Spiders | 5.86
|
Insects | 5.9
|
Beetles | 5.98
|
Lepidoptera | 5.98
|
- Spineless editors overwhelmed by stubs
Within the Tree of Life and its many subprojects, there is an abundance of stubs. Welcome to Wikipedia, what's new, right? However, based on all wikiprojects listed (just over two thousand), the Tree of Life project is worse off in average article quality than most. Based on the concept of relative WikiWork (the average number of "steps" needed to have a project consisting of all featured articles (FAs), where stub status → FA consists of six steps), only seven projects within the ToL have an average rating of "start class" or better. Many projects, particularly those involving invertebrates, hover at an average article quality slightly better than a stub. With relative WikiWorks of 5.98 each, WikiProject Lepidoptera and WikiProject Beetles have the highest relative WikiWork of any project. Given that invertebrates are incredibly speciose, it may not surprise you that many articles about them are lower quality. WikiProject Beetles, for example, has over 20 times more articles than WikiProject Cats. Wikipedia will always be incomplete, so we should take our relatively low WikiWork as motivation to write more articles that are also better in quality.
- Editor Spotlight: Showing love to misfit taxa
We're joined for this month's Editor Spotlight by NessieVL, a long-time contributor who lists themselves as a member of WikiProject Fungus, WikiProject Algae, and WikiProject Cephalopods.
1) Enwebb: How did you come to edit articles about organisms and taxonomic groups?
- Nessie: The main force, then and now, driving me to create or edit articles is thinking "Why isn't there an article on that on Wikipedia?" Either I'll read about some rarely-sighted creature in the deep sea or find something new on iNaturalist and want to learn more. First stop (surprise!) is Wikipedia, and many times there is just a stub or no page at all. Sometimes I just add the source that got me to the article, not sometimes I go deep and try to get everything from the library or online journals and put it all in an article. The nice thing about taxa is the strong precedent that all accepted extant taxa are notable, so one does not need to really worry about doing a ton of research and having the page get removed. I was super worried about this as a new editor: I still really dislike conflict so if I can avoid it I do. Anyway, the most important part is stitching an article in to the rest of Wikipedia: Linking all the jargon, taxonomers, pollinators, etc., adding categories, and putting in the correct WikiProjects. Recently I have been doing more of the stitching-in stuff with extant articles. The last deep-dive article I made was Karuka at the end of last year, which is a bit of a break for me. I guess it's easier to do all the other stuff on my tablet while watching TV.
2) Enwebb: Many editors in the ToL are highly specialized on a group of taxa. A look at your recently created articles includes much diversity, though, with viruses, bacteria, algae, and cnidarians all represented—are there any commonalities for the articles you work on? Would you say you're particularly interested in certain groups?
- Nessie: I was a nerd from a time when that would get you beat up, so I like odd things and underdogs. I also avoid butting heads, so not only do I find siphonophores and seaweeds fascinating I don't have to worry about stepping on anyone's toes. I go down rabbitholes where I start writing an article like Mastocarpus papillatus because I found some growing on some rocks, then in my research I see it is parasitized by Pythium porphyrae, which has no article, and how can that be for an oomycete that oddly lives in the ocean and also attacks my tasty nori. So then I wrote that article and that got me blowing off the dust on other Oomycota articles, encouraged by the pull of propagating automatic taxoboxes. Once you've done the taxonomy template for the genus, well then you might as well do all the species now that the template is taken care of for them too. and so on until I get sucked in somewhere else. I think it's good to advocate for some of these 'oddball' taxa as it makes it easier for editors to expand their range from say plants to the pathogenic microorganisms of their favorite plant.
- My favorite clades though, It's hard to pick for a dilettante like me. I like working on virus taxonomy, but I can't think of a specific virus species that I am awed by. Maybe Tulip breaking virus for teaching us economics or Variola virus for having so many smallpox deities, one of which was popularly sung about by Desi Arnaz and then inspired the name of a cartoon character who was then misremembered and then turned into a nickname for Howard Stern's producer Gary Dell'Abate. Sorry, really had to share that chain, but for a species that's not a staple food it probably has the most deities. But anyway, for having the most species that wow me, I love a good fungus or algae, but that often is led by my stomach. Also why I seem to research so many plant articles. You can't eat siphonophores, at least I don't, but they are fascinating with their federalist colonies of zooids. Bats are all amazing, but the task force seems to have done so much I feel the oomycetes and slime moulds need more love. Same thing with dinosaurs (I'm team Therizinosaurus though). But honestly, every species has that one moment in the research where you just go, wow, that's so interesting. For instance, I loved discovering that the picture-winged fly (Delphinia picta) has a mating dance that involves blowing bubbles. Now I keep expecting them to show me when they land on my arm, but no such luck yet.
3) Enwebb: I noticed that many of your recent edits utilize the script Rater, which aids in quickly reassessing the quality and importance of an article. Why is it important to update talk page assessments of articles? I also noticed that the quality rating you assign often aligns with ORES, a script that uses machine-learning to predict article quality. Coincidence?
- Nessie: I initially started focusing on WikiProject talk page templates because they seem to be the key to data collecting and maintenance for articles, much more so than categories. This is where you note of an article needs an image, or audio, or a range map. It's how the cleanup listing bot sorts articles, and how Plantdrew does his automated taxobox usage stats. The latter inspired me to look for articles on organisms that are not assigned to any ToL WikiProjects which initially was in the thousands. I got it down to zero with just copypasta so you can imagine I was excited when I saw the rater tool. Back then I rated everything stub/low because it was faster: I couldn't check every article for the items on the B-class checklists. Plus each project has their own nuances to rating scales and I thought the editors in the individual projects would take it from there. I also thought all species were important, so how can I choose a favorite? Now it is much easier with the rater tool and the apparent consensus with Abductive's method of rating by the pageviews (0-9 views/day is low, 10-99 is med, 100-999 is high...). For the quality I generally go by the ORES rating, you caught me. It sometimes is thrown off by a long list of species or something, but it's generally good for stub to C: above that needs formal investigation and procedures I am still learning about. It seems that in the ToL projects we don't focus so much on getting articles to GA/FA so it's been harder to pick up. It was a little culture shock when I went on the Discord server and it seemed everyone was obsessed with getting articles up in quality. I think ToL is focusing on all the missing taxa and (re)organizing it all, which when you already have articles on every anime series or whatever you can focus on bulking the articles up more. In any event, on my growing to-do list is trying to get an article up to FA or GA and learn the process that way so I can better do the quality ratings and not just kick the can down the road.
4) Enwebb: What, if anything, can ToL and its subprojects do to better support collaboration and coordination among editors? How can we improve?
- Nessie: I mentioned earlier that the projects are the main way maintenance is done. And it is good that we have a bunch of subprojects that let those tasks get broken up into manageable pieces. Frankly I'm amazed anything gets done with WikiProject Plants with how huge its scope is. Yet this not only parcels out the work but the discussion as well. A few editors like Peter coxhead and Plantdrew keep an eye on many of the subprojects and spread the word, but it's still easy for newer editors to get a little lost. There should be balance between the lumping and splitting. The newsletter helps by crossing over all the WikiProjects, and if the discord channel picked up that would help too. Possibly the big Enwiki talk page changes will help as well.
5) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?
- Nessie: I'm not sure anything would be surprising. I focus on nature offline too, foraging for mushrooms or wild plants and trying to avoid ticks and mosquitos. I have started going magnet fishing lately, more to help clean up the environment than in the hopes of finding anything valuable. But it would be fun to find a weapon and help solve a cold case or something.
- June DYKs
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Tree of Life Newsletter
- July 2019—Issue 004
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
List of felids by PresN |
Letter-winged kite by Casliber |
The WikiCup, an annual editing competition, is now in its fourth round. Casliber, consistent participant since 2010 and winner in 2016, is currently dominating Group A with 601 points. Largely responsible is the successful Featured Article nomination of Masked booby. The other remaining Tree of Life participant, Enwebb, is participating in her first ever WikiCup. In this round, she has a grand total of...5 points. But with the recent Featured Article nomination of Megabat, she stands to gain 600 points if successful. As it stands, though, it appears that at least one ToL editor is headed to the fifth and final round of 8 contestants, which begins September 1. Thus far, all participants in the WikiCup have generated 17 Featured Articles, 116 Good Articles, 16 Featured Lists, and 57 Featured Pictures. The Good Article Nominations backlog has been reduced as well, with 286 Good Article Reviews. |
For this month's editor spotlight we're joined by Charlesjsharp, a longtime contributor to Wikimedia Commons with a plethora of featured pictures on English Wikipedia. 1) Starsandwhales: How long have you been editing Wikipedia, and how did you get interested? How did you begin your journey of photographing wildlife?
2) S&W: Over the years, you've taken photos of many different organisms from birds to insects to big cats; you have an extensive list of favorite images. Which animals have been the most exciting for you to photograph?
3) S&W: Many articles under ToL have requests for people to add images that can go unanswered. What can the community do to improve the coverage of different organisms on Wikipedia, especially when it comes to images?
4) S&W: What advice would you give to people new to photographing wildlife?
5) S&W: What would the Tree of Life community be surprised to learn about your life off-wiki?
* An example of cumbersome code: getting the layout of my responses to your questions. So dated, and no online spellchecker. |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
- A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.
- Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.
- Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
- The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
It has...
Treated me well -- life, that is. Thank you for the note you left on my page. I just happened to look today and was really touched by some of the messages people have left over the years, including yours. Has it really been that long? I guess it has. The reason I even bothered to check was the reporting in the last few days on 8chan and its split from 4chan. It reminded me of the circumstances that drove me from this place. No use in rehashing all that, you certainly know it well. But the parallels are stark. That aside, it was delightful to hear from you, and to see those expressions of love and kindness that I could never allow myself to see because of how painful that whole ordeal became. Take good care, you and everyone else reading this. · Katefan0 (scribble) 20:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of History of Tobago
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article History of Tobago you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kim Post -- Kim Post (talk) 15:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm glad to see you're continuing to improve History of Tobago. Could you ping me when you think it's ready for me to take another look at it? Kim Post (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Seven years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:31, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Gerda Arendt! Guettarda (talk) 13:04, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Fifteen years of editing!
Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society
Dear Guettarda/Archive 22,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, Chris troutman! Guettarda (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
August 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- August 2019—Issue 005
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Letter-winged kite by Casliber |
Kosmoceratops by FunkMonk |
Guest column by Thomas Shafee (Evolution and evolvability), Editor in Chief of WikiJournal of Science
Firstly, WikiJSci can be a complementary system for FA review (getting external review, input, and validity). When an Wikipedia article is nominated (via WP:JAN), journal editors go out to non-Wikipedian academics and researchers who have published on the subject on the last five years and invite them to give feedback comments (e.g. Peripatric speciation and Baryonyx). The resulting changes can then be integrated back into the Wikipedia article.
Getting more editors involved in Wikipedia is always a high priority. WikiJSci can also be a way to encourage new people to contribute articles (especially on missing/stub/start topics). An example of an article that was written from scratch by a group of non-Wikipedians is Teladorsagia circumcincta. This not only resulted in a new Wikipedia page on an underdeveloped topic, but introduced the idea of Wikimedia contribution to a group of people who had previously never considered it.
The journal can be a way to get multimedia content reviewed or encourage contribution. The same approach could be easily adapted to sounds (e.g. frog mating calls) or videos (e.g. starfish feet motion). It also allows for tracking of those images in new articles via Altmetric (this example has >200, which is bananas). There aren't any biology examples in WikiJSci yet, but the sister medical journal has published a few summary diagrams, photography, and image galleries. Examples include this gallery by Blausen Medical or the diagram of cell disassembly during apoptosis.
For those interested in other Wikimedia sister projects, there's also broad scope for interactions with the WikiJournals. Perhaps peer reviewed teaching resources could be useful to sit alongside sets of Wikipedia articles and be integrated into Wikiversity courses (like this or this)? Can sections of Wikidata & Wikispecies be peer reviewed? What are the potential avenues for integration with WikiCite, WikiFactMine, Scholia, etc.? Currently, WikiJSci is aiming to be very flexible and try out different formats so long as they can be externally peer reviewed. For more info, see the 2019-06-30 Signpost article and the current sister project proposal. |
1) Enwebb: You're very prolific with DYKs, with over 2,000 nominations credited (in fact, I'll highlight which DYK nominations this month were yours below). What made you become so involved in this part of Wikipedia? Why should Tree of Life editors nominate articles for DYK?
2) Enwebb: I noticed that your DYK nominations reflect a diverse array of flora and fauna, from trees, marine invertebrates, birds, fishes, and mammals. How do you decide what to work on?
3) Enwebb: Which of your Wikipedia accomplishments are you most proud of?
4) Enwebb: What motivates you to keep contributing? What's your 10,000 ft view (pardon the non-SI) of the community and Tree of Life?
6) Enwebb: How did you first become interested in natural history?
|
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:43, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
WikiCup 2019 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 5, 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. 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 (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).
- Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
- Floquenbeam • Lectonar
- DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana
- Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime
- Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
- The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
- A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.
AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!
Greetings!
After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.
The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.
On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:
- Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
- Diversity winner
- Gender-gap fillers
For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
September 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- September 2019—Issue 006
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Kosmoceratops by FunkMonk |
Apororhynchus by Mattximus |
|
5
10
15
20
'02
'04
'06
'08
'10
'12
'14
'16
'18
This month saw a vanishingly rare occurrence for the Tree of Life: a new WikiProject joined the fold. WikiProject Diptera, however, is also unusual in being a classroom project. Whether or not this project will stay active once the semester ends remains to be seen. It does not bode well, however, that WP:WikiProject Vespidae—a creation from the same instructor at St. Louis University—faded to obscurity shortly after the fall semester concluded in 2014. WikiProject Vespidae is defunct and now redirects to the Hymenoptera task force of WikiProject Insects. Since 2014, the Tree of Life has seen a string of years where one or zero projects or task forces were created. The only projects and task forces created since then are WikiProject Animal anatomy (2014), Hymenoptera task force (2016), Bats task force (2017), WikiProject Hypericaceae (2018), and now WikiProject Diptera (2019). The year 2006 saw the greatest creation of WikiProjects and task forces, with fourteen still active and the remaining six as "semiactive", "inactive", or "defunct". |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 22:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – October 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories
.
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
- As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
- The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
- The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC
focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future
, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.
- The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Listgap
Too hard to edit a conversation on my iPad. I was puzzled at first but MOS:LISTGAP's examples are discussions. I admit I wasn't aware of this, and I'm guessing were typical of most editors. Doug Weller talk 20:23, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Discuss Agroecological restoration
Hi there. You reverted a name change and wanted to discuss. Sure! I left a discussion at the talk page, but no discussion! You say "that's not how it works", wellll... I go to the page explaining how to change a name and it says if you don't expect any controversy go ahead -which I did, as I didn't expect any... besides you reverting or deleting stuff, the article has basically stayed the same since it was written back in 2008 or so. To the point, none of the sources establish that this terminology exists outside of wikipedia. The sources used are about increasing biodiversity on farms. Had that been apparent from the get-go I might have left more in the article under the new heading. The article is basically inventing jargonism based on a confused or idiosyncratic understanding of agroecology. The title doesn't even make sense: "restoration of the study of the interactions of organisms with the environment of an agricultural setting". I found another article titled "Agricultural biodiversity", very similar to my name, but that is actually about crop diversity. Better that get renamed/merged as well! Leo Breman (talk) 21:05, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
WikiCup 2019 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Adam Cuerden (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:
- Adam Cuerden (submissions) with 964 points
- Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 899 points
- Casliber (submissions) with 817 points
- Kosack (submissions) with 691 points
- SounderBruce (submissions) with 388 points
- Enwebb (submissions) with 146 points
- Usernameunique (submissions) with 145 points
- HaEr48 (submissions) with 74 points
All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. 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 in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!
- Casliber (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for a total of 7 FAs during the course of the competition.
- Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 14 GAs in round 5.
- Yashthepunisher (submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 4 FLs overall.
- Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, for 91 FPs overall.
- MPJ-DK (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 7 articles in good topics in round 2.
- Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 14 did you know articles in round 5.
- Muboshgu (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 7 in the news articles in round 1.
- Ed! (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 56 good article reviews in round 1.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. 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 2020 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
October 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- October 2019—Issue 007
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Meinhard Michael Moser by J Milburn |
King brown snake by Casliber |
|
By request from another editor, this month I wrote an overview of ways that content is featured on Wikipedia. Below I have outlined some of the processes for getting content featured: Did You Know (DYK)What is it: A way for articles to appear on the main page of Wikipedia. A short hook in the format of "Did you know...that ___" presents unusual and interesting facts to the reader, hopefully making the reader want to click through to the article How it works: The DYK process has fairly low barriers for participation. The eligibility criteria are few and relatively easy to meet. Some important guidelines:
The process for creating the nomination is somewhat tedious. Instructions can be found here (official instructions) and here ("quick and nice" guide to DYK). Experience is the best teacher here, so don't be afraid to try and fail a few times. The last few DYK nominations I've done, however, have been with the help of SD0001's DYK-helper script, which makes the process a bit more streamlined (you create the template from a popup box on the article; created template is automatically transcluded to nominations page and article talk page) Once your nomination is created and transcluded, it will need to be reviewed. The reviewer will check that the article meets the eligibility criteria, that the hook is short enough, cited, and interesting, and that other requirements are met, such as for images. If you've been credited with more than 5 DYKs, the reviewer will also check that you've reviewed someone else's nomination for each article that you nominate. This is called QPQ (quid pro quo). You can check how many credited DYKs you've had here to see if QPQ is required for you to nominate an article for DYK. Good Article (GA)What it is: A peer review process to determine that an article meets a set of criteria. This adds a symbol to the top of the article. About 1 in 200 articles on Wikipedia is a GA. How it works: You follow the instructions to nominate an article, placing a template on its talk page. Anyone can nominate an article—you don't have to be a major contributor, though it is considered polite to inform the major contributors that you are nominating the article. The article is added to a queue to await a review. In the ToL, it seems that reviews happen pretty quickly, thanks to our dedicated members. Once the review begins, the reviewer will offer suggestions to help the article meet the 6 GA criteria. Upon addressing all concerns, the reviewer will pass the article, and voilà! Good Article! Advice to a first-time nominator: Look at other Good Articles in related areas before nominating. If you're unsure about nominating, consider posting to the talk page of your project to see what other editors think. You can also have a more experienced editor co-nominate the article with you. Featured Article (FA)What it is: An exhaustive peer review to determine that an articles meets the criteria. This adds a to the top of the article. About 1 in 1,000 articles on Wikipedia is a FA. How it works: You follow the instructions to nominate an article, placing a template on its talk page. Nominated articles are usually GAs already. Uninvolved editors can nominate, though the article's regular editors should be consulted first. Several editors will come by offering feedback, eventually supporting or opposing promotion to FA. A coordinator will determine if there is consensus to promote the article to FA. For an editor's first FA, spot checks to verify that the sources support the text are conducted. Advice to a first-time nominator: The Featured Article Candidate (FAC) process is a bit intimidating, but several steps can make your first one easier (speaking as someone who has exactly one). If you also did the GA nomination of the article, you can ask the reviewer for "extra" feedback beyond the GA criteria. You can also formally request a peer review and/or a copy edit from the Guild of Copy Editors to check for content and mechanics. First-time nominators are encouraged to seek the help of a mentor for a higher likelihood of passing their first FAC. Good and Featured Topics (GT and FT)What it is: It took me a while to realize we even had GT and FT on Wikipedia, as they are not very common relative to GA and FA. Both GT and FT are collections of related articles of high quality (all articles at GA or FA, all lists at Featured List). GT/FT have to be at least 3 articles with no obvious gaps in coverage of the topic, along with other criteria. For GT, all articles have to be GA quality and all lists must be FL. For FT, at least half the articles must be FA or FL, with the remaining articles at GA. How it works: Follow the nomination procedures for creating a new topic or adding an article to an existing topic. Other editors weigh in to support or oppose the proposal. Coordinators determine if there is consensus to promote to GT/FT. Advice to a first-time nominator: There are very few GT/FT in Tree of Life (5 GT and 11 FT). Most of the legwork appears to be improving a cohesive set of articles to GA/FA. |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.
- The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
- A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.
- Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.
A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.
Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.
The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.
Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
The file File:SanFdoTT.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
moore
Thanks for your intervention. The response was not encouraging :(. I don't know your coordinates, but happy Thanksgiving if you celebrate. --JBL (talk) 12:41, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – December 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
- EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
- Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂
Interface administrator changes
- An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
- Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.
- Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)
- Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive
.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
November 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- November 2019—Issue 008
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
King brown snake by Casliber |
News at a Glance |
|
Class is in Session in the Tree of Life |
In an interesting turn of events, this month's guest column is by my alter-ego, Elysia (Wiki Ed): *Puts on Wiki Education hat* Hi everyone, I'm Elysia and I work for Wiki Education. You may know me as Enwebb. I got a request last month to let you know how Wiki Education is intersecting with the Tree of Life subprojects. As one of Wiki Education's major goals is to improve topics related to the sciences, leading to our Communicating Science initiative, we end up supporting quite a few in the biological sciences. Here are the TOL-related courses active this term: What is the impact of student editors in Tree of Life? Altogether, these 16 courses have 347 student participants. As the end of the semester hasn't come yet, these numbers are still growing, but these students have:
Some of our best student work this semester (of any kind, not just biodiversity) has come from Agelaia's Behavioural Ecology course—you may remember this as the course that created WikiProject Diptera. The students have several Good Article nominations, including Dryomyza anilis, Anastrepha ludens, Aedes taeniorhynchus, Drosophila silvestris, Drosophila subobscura, and Ceratitis capitata. And while long-term participation from students is low, there's always the chance that we'll discover a Wikipedian. I had never edited before my Wikipedia assignment in 2017 and I'm still here nearly 20,000 edits later! After I poked around in the beginning of the semester, I had the realization that not many people write Wikipedia, and very few of those have a special interest in bats. If I didn't stick around to write the content, there was no guarantee that it would ever get done. Why are species articles suitable for students? Writing about taxonomic groups is a great fit for students, as it keeps them away from areas where new editors traditionally struggle. The notability policy is generous towards taxa, and there is little danger of a student's work getting removed for lack of notability; this is to be expected when students write biographies. Students may struggle with encyclopedic tone for biographies and stray towards promotional writing, but this is much less common when writing about a shrew or algae! Additionally, we're never going to run out of species to write about. Students have a bounty of stubs and redlinks to pick from. Creating a new article or expanding an existing one also takes a fairly predictable structure, with plenty of articles that students can model after. Don't students just create messes for volunteers to clean up? Our sincere hope is that, no, they don't, and we take several steps to try to minimize the burden on volunteer labor. With automatic plagiarism detection, alerts when students edit a Good or Featured Article, and notifications when students edit an article subject to discretionary sanctions, we try to stay ahead of problems as much as possible. We also review all student work at the end of each term. Ian, Shalor, and I are always happy to receive pings alerting us to student issues that need to be addressed. |
November DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Your GA nomination of History of Tobago
The article History of Tobago you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:History of Tobago for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kim Post -- Kim Post (talk) 02:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Be well at Christmas
Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear | |
Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork (talk) 17:41, 23 December 2019 (UTC) |
Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers 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. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup 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. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
December 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter
- December 2019—Issue 009
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Apororhynchus by Mattximus |
Cactus wren by CaptainEek |
News at a Glance |
|
Editor Spotlight: Plantdrew |
We're joined this month by long-time editor Plantdrew, who's currently engaged in streamlining the taxonomic structure of Wikipedia articles via the automated taxobox system. How did you become a Wikipedian? What are your particular interests (besides the obvious of "plants")?
What projects are keeping you busy around the 'pedia at present?
What's your favorite plant?
What's your background like? How did you come to have a special interest in biology?
What's something that would surprised TOL editors about your life off-wiki?
Anything else you'd like us to know?
|
December DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Administrators' newsletter – January 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).
|
|
- A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
- A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
- Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.
- The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being
the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted
rather thanreasonably construed
. - Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.
- The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being
- This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!
Your GA nomination of History of Tobago
The article History of Tobago you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:History of Tobago for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kim Post -- Kim Post (talk) 05:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Kim Post: Thanks. I've been so swamped the last fee weeks. Not having this to stress about as well is a good forr me, even if it's very disappointing. Guettarda (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).
|
Interface administrator changes
|
- Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
- The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with
wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input
. No proposed process received consensus.
- Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
- When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [5]
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
- Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!
January 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- January 2020—Issue 010
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Megarachne by Ichthyovenator |
Wolf by LittleJerry |
News at a Glance |
|
Vital Articles | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The vital articles project on English Wikipedia began in 2004 when an editor transferred a list from Meta-Wiki: List of articles every Wikipedia should have. The first incarnation of the list became what is now level 3. As of 2019, there are 5 levels of vital articles:
Each level is inclusive of all previous levels, meaning that the 1,000 Level 3 articles include those listed on Levels 2 and 1. Below is an overview of the distribution of vital articles, and the quality of the articles. While the ultimate goal of the vital articles project is to have Featured-class articles, I also considered Good Articles to be "complete" for the purposes of this list. Animals (1,148 designated out of projected 2,400)
Plants, fungi, and other organisms (510 designated out of projected 1,200)
Many articles have yet to be designated for Tree of Life taxonomic groups, with 1,942 outstanding articles to be added. Anyone can add vital articles to the list! Restructuring may be necessary, as the only viruses included as of yet are under the category "Health". The majority of vital articles needing improvement are level 5, but here are some outstanding articles from the other levels:
· Abiogenesis · Death · Cell · Human evolution · Organism · Zoology · Cattle · Dog · Reptile · Flower · Nut · Seed · Algae · Eukaryote · Biodiversity · Extinction · Photosynthesis
· Sexual dimorphism · Feather · Fur · Hair · Gill · Plant anatomy · Plant morphology · Berry · Leaf · Root · Stoma · Shrub · Plant stem · Bark · Trunk · Epidermis · Ground tissue · Meristem · Vascular tissue · Vascular cambium · Hypha · Mycelium |
January DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the Alexlubbenvice (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
WikiCup 2020 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.
Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
- Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
- Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
- Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
- Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
- CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
- The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included L293D, Kingsif, Enwebb, Lee Vilenski and CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 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.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
WikiCup newsletter correction
There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).
|
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
must not
undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather thanshould not
. - A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
- Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.
- Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
- The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.
February 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- February 2020—Issue 011
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Segnosaurus by FunkMonk |
Danuvius guggenmosi by Dunkleosteus77 |
News at a Glance |
|
The spread of coronavirus across Wikipedia | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
With the outbreak of a novel coronavirus dominating news coverage, Wikipedia content related to the virus has seen much higher interest. Tree of Life content of particular interest to readers has included viruses, bats, pangolins, and masked palm civets. Viruses saw the most dramatic growth in readership: Coronavirus, which was the 105th most popular virus article in December 2019 with about 400 views per day, averaged over a quarter million views each day of January 2020. Total monthly viewership of the top-10 virus articles ballooned from about 1.5 million to nearly 20 million.
From October 2019 – December 2019, the top ten most popular bat articles fluctuated among 16 different articles, with the December viewership of those 10 articles at 209,280. For January 2020, three articles broke into the top-10 that were not among the 16 articles of the prior three months: Bat as food, Horseshoe bat, and Bat-borne virus. Viewership of the top-10 bat articles spiked nearly 300% to 617,067 in January. While bats have been implicated as a possible natural reservoir of SARS-CoV-2, an intermediate host may be the bridge between bats and humans. Pangolins have been hypothesized as the intermediate host for the virus, causing a large spike in typical page views of 2-3k each day up to more than 60k in a day. Masked palm civets, the intermediate host of SARS, saw a modest yet noticeable spike in page views as well, from 100 to 300 views per day to as many as 5k views per day. With an increase in viewers came an increase in editors. In an interview, longtime virus editor Awkwafaba identified the influx of editors as the biggest challenge in editing content related to the coronavirus. They noted that these newcomers include "novices who make honest mistakes and get tossed about a bit in the mad activity" as well as "experienced editors who know nothing about viruses and are good researchers, yet aren't familiar with the policies of WP:ToL or WP:Viruses." Disruption also increased, with extended confirmed protection (also known as the 30/500 rule, which prevents editors with fewer than 30 days tenure and 500 edits from making edits and is typically used on a very small subset of Wikipedia articles) temporarily applied to Coronavirus and still active on Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data. New editors apparently seeking to correct misinformation continuously edited the article Bat as food to remove content related to China: Videos of Chinese people eating bat soup were misrepresented to be current or filmed in China, when at least one such video was several years old and filmed in Palau. However, reliable sources confirm that bats are eaten in China, especially Southern China, so these well-meaning edits were mostly removed. Another level of complexity was added by the fluctuating terminology of the virus. Over a dozen moves and merges were requested within WikiProject Viruses. To give you an idea of the musical chairs happening with article titles, here are the move histories of two articles: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
Awkwafaba noted that "the main authorities, WHO and ICTV, don't really have a process for speedily naming a virus or disease." Additionally, they have different criteria for naming. They said, "I remember in a move discussion from the article then called Wuhan coronavirus that a virus name cannot have a geographical location in it, but this is a WHO disease naming guideline, and not an ICTV virus naming rule. ICTV may have renamed Four Corners virus to Sin Nombre orthohantavirus but there are still plenty of official virus species names that don't abide by WHO guidelines." |
February DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
Possible compromise
I've suggested a possible compromise between you and Jweiss11 on the talk page of the race and intelligence article, so I'd like to know whether this proposal is acceptable to both of you. 2600:1004:B14B:BF17:DD28:947E:9154:ADCF (talk) 23:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Bactris jamaicana
Hello! Your submission of Bactris jamaicana at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harrias talk 17:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Bactris jamaicana
On 24 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bactris jamaicana, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1725 Hans Sloane described a plant he called Prickly-Pole as the Jamaican tree species that was "the most fit to make Rods and Scowrers for Guns"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bactris jamaicana. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bactris jamaicana), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Descriptions
I have no reason other than previous formats on other articles. Please feel free to change them if needed. That is the only intention, so I apologize if that has been a problem. Red Director (talk) 02:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Red Director: Thanks.
I have no reason other than previous formats on other article
- What other articles do you mean? We shouldn't be referring to the country as "Trinidad" unless it's pre-1889. And it's a big NPOV failure to push a "Trinidadian" identity at the expense of a Trinidad and Tobago identity. It isn't ok to push a separatist political agenda. Guettarda (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Guettarda: Some of the articles in their openings refer to the individual as "Trinidadian". How the short descriptions were being used on other descriptions were just straight verbatim. I will adhere to what you said here to pre-1889 individuals. I only really do short descriptions and minor formatting on those and not content. Just let me know if anything needs to be modified in addition. Thanks. Red Director (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
- There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.
- There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
- The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
March 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter
- March 2020—Issue 012
- Tree of Life
- Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Argentinosaurus by Slate Weasel and Jens Lallensack |
Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations by Britishfinance |
News at a glance |
|
A new WikiProject responding to the pandemic | ||
The newest Tree of Life WikiProject is about a taxon that is dominating the headlines, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and its many effects. We interviewed Another Believer, the founder of WikiProject COVID-19. This interview has been edited for length. Find the full interview here.
Number of participants of WikiProject Covid-19
Thank you to Another Believer for your time, both in this interview and in this project. Interested readers can join WikiProject COVID-19. And please stay safe and healthy out there. --Awkwafaba |
March DYKs |
|
You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.
DYK for Desmoncus
On 6 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Desmoncus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that most species in the palm genus Desmoncus climb using grappling hook–like structures called acanthopylls? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Desmoncus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Desmoncus), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
DYK for National Union of Freedom Fighters
On 9 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article National Union of Freedom Fighters, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the National Union of Freedom Fighters in Trinidad and Tobago was the only group to sustain a guerrilla insurgency in the modern English-speaking Caribbean over an extended period of time? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/National Union of Freedom Fighters. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, National Union of Freedom Fighters), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
NUFF
The National Union of Freedom Fighters is a very interesting read. Thank you for this contribution to our collective knowledge about the long struggle of the Caribbean people to be independent.--Maleschreiber (talk) 07:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Maleschreiber: Thank you so much for this note. It was interesting to write, fascinating to delve into a part of my own history that seems almost forgotten. Guettarda (talk) 13:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- It is interesting how similar arguments emerge in different parts of the world within national liberation movements about the relation between class and nationhood. I was also wondering about the opinion of this group about C. L. R. James, who by that time had abandoned Trotskyism.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Guettarda. As I said in the thread I opened in Portal talk:Biology, now each article has its own Wikidata item. So I'll leave them as they are. I'll delete the whole thread as per what you said in the page: This is for discussions about the Portal (which few people care about). Thank you for your intervention, and sorry for the inconvenience. Kintaro (talk) 18:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Kintaro: I think at least the Geographic range limit article should be merged with one of those two (probably the species distribution one), so yes, I think it's a good idea. I just think that the Portal page isn't the best venue for the discussion. Guettarda (talk) 20:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Guettarda. As I said, I'm happy with the situation as it is because now we have one Wikidata item an article. If you don't agree with that, feel free to suggest the merge on those talk pages you mentioned (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ecology and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biology). Good luck! Kintaro (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Guettarda. This is only because I'm curious: do you think you'll present a suggestion of merge for those articles? Kintaro (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Honestly, Kintaro, probably not, because I don't have the time to do the merge. I probably wouldn't bother with the discussion anyway, I'd just do the merge, and if someone undid it, then I'd start a discussion. Guettarda (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, thank you. Good luck... Kintaro (talk) 19:29, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Honestly, Kintaro, probably not, because I don't have the time to do the merge. I probably wouldn't bother with the discussion anyway, I'd just do the merge, and if someone undid it, then I'd start a discussion. Guettarda (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Guettarda. This is only because I'm curious: do you think you'll present a suggestion of merge for those articles? Kintaro (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Guettarda. As I said, I'm happy with the situation as it is because now we have one Wikidata item an article. If you don't agree with that, feel free to suggest the merge on those talk pages you mentioned (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ecology and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biology). Good luck! Kintaro (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Sorry
Hey, sorry about the edit in the stats section. I had already started my edit before you put the message up so I didn't see it! Rcul4u998 (talk) 20:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Rcul4u998: It's all good. I was frustrated. I apologise for my reaction. Guettarda (talk) 21:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- It's all good! I'm still not super familiar with all of the different Wiki features, so I didn't know there was a "in use section" template. I'll start using that to make it more clear when I've started long edits! Rcul4u998 (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2020 (UTC)