User talk:NativeForeigner/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors: Wikimania 2012; special projects note Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the Australian 25th Battalion Interview: Article writers discuss buildings and fortifications Op-ed: Hawkeye7 reports on a weekend workshop

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Getting Wikimedians to the Olympic Games

Hi. I am part of an effort to get Wikimedians access to the 2016 Summer Olympics as accredited reporters and photographers. Part of this effort includes covering the 2012 Summer Paralympics. Two Wikimedians have credentials to attend these games as reporters through Wikimedia Australia. As English Wikipedia does not allow original reporting, this is largely through Wikinews with a project page found at Wikinews:Paralympic Games. If you are interested in helping to get Wikimedians to the next Summer Olympics,I'd encourage you to assist with Wikinews efforts, and also to work on all language 2012 Summer Paralympic Wikipedia articles before, during and after the Games to demonstrate a track record of success. Thank you. --LauraHale (talk) 04:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Topeka, Kansas

Template:Editnotices/Page/Topeka, Kansas has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:23, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 August newsletter

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

1. Grapple X (submissions) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
2. Miyagawa (submissions) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
3. Ruby2010 (submissions) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
4. Casliber (submissions) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
5. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
6. Muboshgu (submissions) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
7. Dana Boomer (submissions) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
8. Sasata (submissions) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle: GreatOrangePumpkin (submissions), Ealdgyth (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions), Piotrus (submissions), Toa Nidhiki05 (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), The Bushranger (submissions) and 1111tomica (submissions). We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D on the legacy of World War II Op-ed: Bomzibar on German military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:35, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 September newsletter

We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion. Grapple X (submissions) currently leads, followed by Sasata (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and Casliber (submissions). However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of The Signpost. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely.

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 19:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; award recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: AustralianRupert on artillery in South Australia, and Nick-D on Venice's empire Op-ed: Nick-D on the "Kokoda: Beyond the Legend" conference

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:51, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi NF,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Cavalryatbalaklava2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 25, 2012. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2012-10-25. —howcheng {chat} 21:49, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; milestone for the Fortifications task force; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/October 2012/Hawkeye7 on mission command Op-ed: The ed17 on how The Bugle could be improved

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 02:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Could I create a page thats already been deleted many times?

Lets say I found some refs for a page thats been deleted many times, Can I still create it, for example "Super Panda" was deleted, how many relable sources does their need to be? MrCajak (talk) 19:38, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

If you have legitimate sources you can create it. The original articles were all vandalism/hoaxes (blatantly). However if there was a deletion discussion it needs to address the concerns in hte discussion. NativeForeigner ^Talk 21:26, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 October newsletter

The 2012 WikiCup has come to a close; congratulations to Cwmhiraeth (submissions), our 2012 champion! Cwmhiraeth joins our exclusive club of previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009), Sturmvogel 66 (2010) and Hurricanehink (2011). Our final standings were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
2. Sasata (submissions)
3. Grapple X (submissions)
4. Casliber (submissions)
5. Muboshgu (submissions)
6. Miyagawa (submissions)
7. Ruby2010 (submissions)
8. Dana Boomer (submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

• The featured article award goes to Grapple X (submissions), for four featured articles in the final round.
• The good article award also goes to Grapple X (submissions), for 19 good articles in the second round.
• The list award goes to Muboshgu (submissions), for three featured lists in the final round.
• The topic award goes to Grapple X (submissions), for three good topics (with around 40 articles) in round 4.
• The did you know award goes to Cwmhiraeth (submissions), for well over 100 DYKs in the final round.
• The news award goes to ThaddeusB (submissions), for 10 in the news items in round 3.
• The picture award goes to Grandiose (submissions), for two featured pictures in round 2.
• The reviewer award goes to both Ruby2010 (submissions) (14 reviews in round 1) and Grandiose (submissions) (14 reviews in round 3).
• Finally, for achieving an incredible bonus point total in the final round, and for bringing the top-importance article frog to featured status, a biostar has been awarded to Cwmhiraeth (submissions).

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Wikipedia has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi NF,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:McKinley Prosperity.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on November 6, 2012. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2012-11-06. —howcheng {chat} 23:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel_66, AustralianRupert, and Nick-D look at ships, soldiers, and railways Op-ed: Nick-D on navigating the FA and A-Class review processes

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

A quick note

To say thanks for your timely response to my rollback rights request. It's all much appreciated. Oh No! It's Faustus37! it is what it is - speak at the tone 06:43, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Would you like reviewer as well? NativeForeigner ^Talk 06:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure, go for it. ;-) Oh No! It's Faustus37! it is what it is - speak at the tone 06:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done NativeForeigner ^Talk 06:59, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Sharing some holiday cheer

		Holiday Cheer
		Michael Q. Schmidt my talk page is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings.

The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Simon Harley on British battleships and Nick-D on the French Resistance Interview: Five editors discuss some less-represented areas of military history Op-ed: Ian Rose looks back on 2012

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:14, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Narayana Murthy

Dear admin,

Kkm010 has been involved in disruptive editing. He/she seems to object to the list of awards (including from sources such as TIME magazine, Forbes, etc.) for this person. I have attempted to discuss and provides a list of citations/references on the talk page for this article. This is the third time I am making a case for this. But kkm010 has made no effort to engage on the discussion page. Instead he/she stubbornly undoes the changes and refuses to discuss on the Talk page. This is very disruptive and frustrating. You can see on the talk page that for the past couple of months I have constantly provided arguments for my case. But kkm010 is being very block headed. Can you please help? --- Tib42 (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 starting soon

Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

feedback on training

Hi! Thanks for the feedback on the Ambassadors training. Could you expand a bit on what you meant by "intro to media"? --Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 19:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Elaborated. NativeForeigner ^Talk 19:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! That's a good idea. I'll try to add some material along those lines when I have a chance.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 19:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, no problem. Thanks. NativeForeigner ^Talk 19:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Pro gaming taskforce

NativeForeigner, you've listed yourself as a member of the pro gaming taskforce of WP:VG. If you're still interested in creating and improving articles relating to electronic sports, I'd like to let you know that I'm planning on reorganizing, renaming, and reviving this project! If you're not interested, please remove your name from the list of participants. Thanks! —Entropy ^(talk) 04:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: The month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Mongol naval power Op-ed: Crisco 1492 on war films

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 January newsletter

Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader ( Grapple X (submissions)) had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years. 12george1 (submissions) was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:

• 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score for an article, with the good article Hurricane Gordon (2000). Again, this is a repeat of last year!
• Buggie111 (submissions) was the first to score for a did you know, with Marquis Flowers.
• Spencer (submissions) was the first to score for an in the news, with 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede.
• Status (submissions) was the first to score for a featured list, with list of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) was the first to score for a featured picture, with File:Thure de Thulstrup - L. Prang and Co. - Battle of Gettysburg - Restoration by Adam Cuerden.jpg.

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:

• Ed! (submissions) was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
• Hawkeye7 (submissions) has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
• HueSatLum (submissions) claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of The C of E (submissions), who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

My first SPI clerk action

Hi. I declined a CU request just now. Did I do this properly? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. Noting lack of diffs was probably a tad gratuitous but isn't bad by any means. NativeForeigner ^Talk 17:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Under the circumstances, it seemed better than summarily, bureaucratically closing the entire request per the "without exception" requirement for diffs — and also better than risking a rebuke for having neglected to enforce this technical requirement. But I'll certainly be happy to overlook this particular issue in future requests like this one, where the request is crystal clear and the "spirit of the law" has clearly been followed. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it wasn't unreasonable. GEnerally for things that simple it's ideal to have diffs but I"ll just dig them up myself for a CU. NativeForeigner ^Talk 19:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Alexander Mirtchev SPI

I think I figured it out: [1] Please let me know if I'm off base... or if I should look a little harder to find the other pages they are manipulating. PR firms that whitewash the evils of the world's dictatorships should not be on Wikipedia imho. KazakhBT (talk) 20:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at US Army leadership since World War II

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter

Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:

1. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), primarily for an array of warship GAs.
2. Miyagawa (submissions), primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
3. Casliber (submissions), due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with Keilana (submissions), this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:

• Sven Manguard (submissions), whose Portal:Massachusetts is the first featured portal this year. The featured portal process is one of the less well-known featured processes, and featured portals have traditionally had little impact on WikiCup scores.
• Sasata (submissions), whose Mycena aurantiomarginata was the first featured article this year.
• Muboshgu (submissions) and Wizardman (submissions), who both claimed points for articles in the Major League Baseball tie-breakers topic, the first topic points in the competition.
• Toa Nidhiki05 (submissions), who claimed for the first full good topic with the Casting Crowns studio albums topic.

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 11:46, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Camoka4

Instead of declining this one because the puppet master account's edits are stale, should I instead have endorsed it for sleeper checks? If so, could you review with me exactly what we reasonably might expect a CU to find in a situation like this? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 23:38, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

It was a good decline. User has no history of making sockpuppet accounts (all IPs up to this point). Realistically a CU might find a correlation between this and any potential sleeprs as being identical but in this case the odds look extremely low. NativeForeigner ^Talk 02:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

=)

Hello NativeForeigner, Eduemoni↑talk↓ has given you a shinning smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shinning Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abhidevananda

Thanks for closing the SPI. I had thought that was the correct venue for handling canvassing and meat puppets. Which venue should I raise this in instead? Best, Garamond Lethet
c 07:06, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

At least the way I see it it's gone beyond the scope of an SPI. There are canvassing issues that would seem to extend beyond the scope of SPI, probably ANI would be reasonable although I hate to refer to it as its sort of seen as a catchall. NativeForeigner ^Talk 11:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello NativeForeigner. Garamond and Cornelius's additional info on this SPI is continuing to go into the arena of canvassing. If I understand you correctly, raising these canvassing issues is not appropriate to this SPI. Despite your clear instruction to keep the info related to socks, it seems that SPI is continuing to be a place to discuss everything but socks. --DezDeMonaaa (talk) 05:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Uninvolved admin needed at SPI, PROUT. Thank you.--Cornelius383 (talk) 21:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Uninvolved admin needed at SPI, PROUT. Thank you.--Cornelius383 (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Uninvolved admin needed at SPI, PROUT. Thank you.--Cornelius383 (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

NativeForeigner, it looks as though this AN thread could be closed with a note that the SPI has closed: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Closure of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations.2FAbhidevananda. Thanks! Location (talk) 14:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Advice on non-free copyright image

Hi, I was hoping you could give me some advice on the use of non-free copyright image. I am looking for an image to include on this section of this section of Illmatic. And I figured this would be a perfect one... Unfortunately, its copyrighted by XXL magazine. Could I justify its use on the Illmatic page?

Your advice would be greatly appreciated Chubdub (talk) 16:46, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

No, it doesn't really provide for enhanced commentary, its just illustrating, and hence doesn't pass the NFCC, unforunately. NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:52, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. Can you confirm whether this use of the '5 mics' (non-free image) passes the criteria? 5 mics is a rating system that is unique to the magazine. No other publication uses it. I figured since it's so uncommon, and yet so important to the topic at hand, it would be nice to add a visual commentary for those who might be unfamiliar with it. Chubdub (talk) 02:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Eh. It's a fairly close call. NFCC 8 is probably the most relevant. NativeForeigner ^Talk 09:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I initially choose as my rationale. Could you take a look at wrote in "purpose of use", and if it meets the NFCC criteria, would you append " |image has rationale=yes as a parameter to the license template." . Chubdub (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Wait, I was misenterpreting how you wanted it to be used. For that article, it's a fairly clear no. It's a strange way to assess but a picture of it doesn't really add much value, at least in my opinion. If one wanted to use it on the Source magazine page, I think that would be more acceptable. NativeForeigner ^Talk 17:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I respect your opinion Nativeforeigner. Are the other administrators gonna feel the same way? I dunno...it just seems to me that a reader (absent some visual representation) might potentially confuse something like a '5 mic' rating with a '5 star' one - if it's only expressed using text. A visual could help make the distinction a lot clearer, don't ya think? (....especially for an article like Illmatic, that contains so many other reviews and ratings; I would not want the uniqueness or the significance of this one to be obscured) Chubdub (talk) 19:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I would agree that it does have merit, but I don't think that it is consistent with the nfcc. I'm generally versed in fair use guidelines but I don't have a ton of experience, especially of late. You are probably best off posting your question/concern to non free content review. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:42, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks! Chubdub (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Fekete

I just wanted to point out that you seem to have missed Jonathan Mendoza whose article was also under discussion at this afd when you closed it. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, its taken care of. I did notice the second article but for whatever reason assumed the script deleted it as well. I don't close that often, and will keep it in mind. NativeForeigner ^Talk 01:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

re: Neo

Hey NF .. looked like you were out for a bit (looked at your contribs) .. I went ahead and unblocked Neo. TY for the AGF, discussion, and efforts to bring people back into the fold. ttyl — Ched :  ?  12:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for taking care of it. NativeForeigner ^Talk 23:44, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Responded

I have posted a response (with diffs) on the Rollosmokes SPI here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 18:38, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

SPI

Any way I can request an open checkuser on my own account? I've been accused variously of operating socks and I'm tired of it. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. If people aren't willing to actually open a SPIs against you and just levy the attack it may be grounds for some sort of administrative action against them, but Checkuser policy clearly states. "On some Wikimedia projects, an editor's IP addresses may be checked upon his or her request, especially to prove innocence against a sockpuppet allegation. Such requests are not accepted on the English Wikipedia." and that is essentially what you would be requesting. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow, so despite the fact I'm being accused of being a sock puppeteer, there's actually no way of proving that wrong? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

His lack of willingness to proceed should indicate the reality of the situation. I looked it over and the editing habits are inconsistent, I really see no similaritiy at all between you and the accused sock. Really, if they pressed sockpuppetry charges against you checkuser would be declined because there just isn't enough evidence there as it is. So theoretically the charges would still be in the air. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

So what's wrong with someone checkusering my account? At my own request? And publishing the results? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Explicit enwiki checkuser policy. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:53, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, so if I create a few socks and then get someone else to go looking, I can get a checkuser on my account? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

A checkuser will not be run on your account because there is no evidence that you are using sockpuppets. Tell the editor who is claiming you have sockpuppets to either put up the evidence at WP:SPI or shut up. His making unfounded sockpuppet accusations is a violation of WP:NPA and can result in him being blocked if he does not stop.

However, creating sockpuppet accounts to get checkuser run on your account is exactly the worst thing to do, and it would likely get you desysopped and blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was kind of joking about creating the socks, I thought that would be obvious, but thanks for the warning. User:PaleCloudedWhite has asserted that he/she is convinced I'm running a sock factory, I've asked him/her to "man up" and present the evidence but nothing is happening. I don't want this to go unresolved. I want the accusations to be retracted, or if not I want action against the user who is obviously violating NPA. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I dropped a note on his talk page outlining the situation as I see it. NativeForeigner ^Talk 21:36, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

A negative checkuser result cannot conclusively disprove sockpuppetry. There are, sadly, many ways for the pervertedly resourceful to gain access to IP addresses located just about anywhere. This, as I understand it, is the main reason why English Wikipedia policies prohibit the use of CU in response to someone's request to prove their innocence — the tool simply can't be used effectively in that way. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 21:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

No, I understand that, but what if all the socks I'm accused of running can be checked, and my account (and my travelling account) can be checked? I'm making that request, it may not be definitive, of course there are ways of spoofing IPs and all that jazz, but I've been here eight years. I'd prefer to see my edit history exposed since my entire history here at Wikipedia is under question from User:PaleCloudedWhite without justification. How can I defend myself from his/her accusations? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/78.8.103.182

Hi NF, I have added more socks there. You may want to take a look. The socks I added all vandalised last night (UTC 8), but I don't know whether today morning (UTC 8) got anymore socks, because I didn't log on. Arctic Kangaroo 07:07, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I blocked a couple ranges, but I tried not to be too invasive. If there are still socks getting through you might wish to talk to Materialscientist (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) regarding rangeblocking wider (or if necessary a hardblock). Alternatively you could deal with any of the SPI clerks listed at WP:SPI/C. I'd assist, but I'll be on a plane in a few hours. NativeForeigner ^Talk 07:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Happy holiday (is it a business trip?)! Arctic Kangaroo 07:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Holiday. NativeForeigner ^Talk 07:32, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at refugees during the Battle of France Interview: Editors discuss writing articles about the former Yugoslavia Op-ed: Prioryman on German V-weapon sites and the historian's responsibility

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Meat

Hi NativeForeigner. Thanks for taking a look at this case. It would appear that the meatpuppets have still not been blocked. There has been a new development where the Fbahja account admits to working in tandem with the Librowall account as a collective "we" (c.f. [2]). This is despite the fact that the two single purpose accounts never had any prior contact or communication on Wikipedia. In fact, the Fbahja account only just yesterday enrolled himself/herself in the wiki course in question, which anyone registered wiki account can do (his username now appears after mine in the chronological "student" list). Could we perhaps do something about this? Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 13:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

It's a class that is collaborating to try to improve that article; I don't think meatpuppetry applies here. Although that class doesn't use an enrollment token (so anyone can theoretically enroll), I don't think there's any reason to think that any of the enrolled students not actually in the class. See Education Program:Georgetown University/Embattled Media: Conflict and War Journalism (Spring 2013). Middayexpress, I think Fbahja and the other students will be receptive to your suggestions; Fbahja was on IRC looking for help last night, and I think they were just hoping for some clarification on why that section was out of scope.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 14:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought that as well originally. However, what changed my mind was that a) the Librowall account indicated that several editors were enrolled in the wiki course, when in fact, he was the only one at the time with the page as his article of interest, b) it turns out that any registered Wikipedian can enroll in that course (I signed myself up and I'm not part of the class), c) the Fbahja account showed up out of nowhere with no prior edits yet precisely the material that the Librowall account alluded to, d) the Fbahja account only yesterday after the case had concluded finally enrolled in the wiki course (his username shows up after mine on the chronological list). Middayexpress (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm certain Fbahja is a student, as they found their way to the help channel last night and I talked with them about it. There's often a bit of confusion about enrolling, when students first start their work on-wiki. The professor, User:Minotaurlives, also has the ability to remove students that he knows aren't actually in his class, so if you suspect someone in particular of not being actually in the class, you might let him know.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 14:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

That's just it, though. The perfect formatting in Fbahja's earlier edit doesn't suggest that he is unfamiliar with wikipedia since the typical newbie has trouble with even that. There's also something about the timing of Librowall's initial talk page message that leads me to suspect that there's perhaps something more at work. He posted it just as I was about to sign off, almost as if he were monitoring my contributions and familiar with my work routine. It could be a coincidence, but I've seen this behavior many times before with established users. The fact that I was able to enroll in that wiki course without actually being a part of the professor's class indicates that any other registered user can as well, including Librowall/Fbahja. At any rate, I appreciate the advice on contacting the class instructor(s). I'll give it a shot, but probably directly through the course's website rather than via wiki. Middayexpress (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

They do get some training on editing mechanics in class, typically. In case you're worried, I do know that the user listed as the professor is, in fact, the professor for that class. He's worked with the education program for multiple previous terms.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 15:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

That edit was ostensibly the account's first post on wikipedia; so I'm not sure where that level of familiarization with the intricacies of wiki formatting could have come from. Seems to also contradict WP:PREC. Middayexpress (talk) 15:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I followed your advice and contacted Minotaurlives. He apparently hasn't edited anything in almost a year, so I'll see if I can reach him directly at the website's contact address. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 March newsletter

We are halfway through round two. Pool A sees the strongest competition, with five out of eight of its competitors scoring over 100, and Pool H is lagging, with half of its competitors yet to score. WikiCup veterans lead overall; Pool A's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) (2010's winner) leads overall, with poolmate Miyagawa (submissions) (a finalist in 2011 and 2012) not far behind. Pool F's Casliber (submissions) (a finalist in 2010, 2011 and 2012) is in third. The top two scorers in each pool, as well as the next highest 16 scorers overall, will progress to round three at the end of April.

Today has seen a number of Easter-themed did you knows from WikiCup participants, and March has seen collaboration from contestants with WikiWomen's History Month. It's great to see the WikiCup being used as a locus of collaboration; if you know of any collaborative efforts going on, or want to start anything up, please feel free to use the WikiCup talk page to help find interested editors. As well as fostering collaboration, we're also seeing the Cup encouraging the improvement of high-importance articles through the bonus point system. Highlights from the last month include GAs on physicist Niels Bohr ( Hawkeye7 (submissions)), on the European hare ( Cwmhiraeth (submissions)), on the constellation Circinus ( Keilana (submissions) and Casliber (submissions)) and on the Third Epistle of John ( Cerebellum (submissions)). All of these subjects were covered on at least 50 Wikipedias at the beginning of the year and, subsequently, each contribution was awarded at least three times as many points as normal.

Wikipedians who enjoy friendly competition may be interested in participating in April's wikification drive. While wikifying an article is typically not considered "significant work" such that it can be claimed for WikiCup points, such gnomish work is often invaluable in keeping articles in shape, and is typically very helpful for new writers who may not be familiar with formatting norms.

A quick reminder: now, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 22:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

You made a helpful comment at this investigation. The same user has another twenty or so IP's up and running, as well as new accounts using the name "Jajadelera". I think that your suggestion of merging the investigations under the name "Jajadelera" is useful. Could you have a look at the current investigation also, please? Another admin saw "no evidence of sock puppetry" because the users weren't active on talkpages... Pretty much all of my WP time is currently spent trying to undo the damage caused by this vandal.  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, we need to merge the cases. I'm busy but I did leave a response there. Based on all the evidence (including the past archive) I'm sure they are related, and the number of IPs is either a lucky coincidence for the user or is purposeful. NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:07, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and I agree. I did notice that the vandal has taken care not to use his named account (Jajadelera2013) for any hoaxing, except for one single time - maybe he forgot to log out? Anyhow, as long as he continues to call himself some form of Jajadelera I shall try to keep stopping him. Thanks again,  Mr.choppers | ✎  05:57, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War Op-ed: ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:22, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 April newsletter

We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Sven Manguard (submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place Casliber (submissions) and second place Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.

The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.

A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 16:08, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet_investigations/MezzoMezzo

Hey!Can you please see Sockpuppet_investigations/MezzoMezzo.its just quite simple request.

Sockpuppet_investigations/MezzoMezzo

Hey!Can you please see Sockpuppet_investigations/MezzoMezzo its just quite simple request.Ghulam Mehar Ali (talk) 08:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Just want to request something with you

Quack. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MezzoMezzo/Archive That was a request which i made some days ago which is now closed.in this edit i presented some strong behavioural evidences about two users. in that request i wrote hundreds of time that look at diffs.my evidences are strong.but they didnt even made effort to see above part of page.mr admin regardless the term who i am the basic SPI that i made on that user was not wrong.I request you to once see diffs on page just read my evidences calmly.confirm it by opening pages and then decide was my request wrong.They completly neglected that.just think once with nutral point of view.i kindly request you to once see and reopen that the Investigation which i basically made.207.172.163.45 (talk) 16:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC) Blocked shared device for a month via SPI report, obvious duck. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 21:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Dumelow on the French Foreign Legion and Nick-D on New Zealand military history Op-ed: Nick-D on military history tourism

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi NativeForeigner! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! 20:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations

Hello NativeForeigner,

Just to inform you that I posted a response on this page : [[3]]

Regards, --Eric.608 (talk) 08:48, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

I was wondering whether you have had the chance to look at the latest links I posted here. [[4]]

Thank you very much

Regards, --Eric.608 (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

I just wanted to know how long does the unblock process take? Do you need anything else from me?

Thanks,--Eric.608 (talk) 17:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Native foreigner,

[[5]] and [[6]] told me that this user: [[7]] blocked again their accounts.

You told me you will personally service all of the unblocks? It seems that Ponyo haven’t read your investigation.

Do I let you contact him, or you prefer that Batista.501 responds to him personally?

Thanks a lot, --Eric.608 (talk) 08:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

SPI clerk training

I do indeed remain interested in undertaking SPI clerk training, and am very happy to accept your offer posted on my talk page. Notwithstanding your kind comment, and in spite of my length of service here, I suspect that you will find significant gaps in my Wikipedia knowledge which, of course, I intend to correct. In terms of timing I am in the UK, and am on-line every day. Not always at the same time. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 08:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

We all have gaps, but you at least have a basis. I am going to use the email function to send you some information regarding my availability and contact information. I'll add you as a trainee clerk as soon as we have that discussion. NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Article restoration request

You were the admin responsible for the deletion of Mitch Clarke (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as a result of this discussion, so i think you're the person i should ask first.

At the time, the article didn't meet the guidelines, but after Clarke's victory at UFC 161 it now meets the minimum requirements of the specific guideline for mixed martial artists (WP:NMMA). Can you restore the article or should i request this in WP:DRV (or maybe WP:UND)? regards — Poison Whiskey 18:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I have done so. NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Poison Whiskey 13:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lovesexy189

Hey, there were two SPI cases open for this user, and you closed the wrong one! (you closed the first, while stating that you blocked the user in the second one.) Could you fix that? Thanks, Ansh666 17:49, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

AFD tags

No worries - I've done the same thing. I was more annoyed at myself, since I didn't notice the date on the AFD before deleting it all over again. Didn't mean to snark about it. Thanks, UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 12:11, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Works on the RNZAF, World War I in the Baltic, and British battleship construction Op-ed: Anchors Aweigh for the Majestic Titans

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:52, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, Casliber (submissions) and Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. 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. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Thunderpilot/Archive

Your warnings ignored. I think this may be an ongoing problem:

• 208.54.4.156 (talk  · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• ‎208.54.4.181 (talk  · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• ‎108.240.108.232 (talk  · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

-LuckyLouie (talk) 18:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

What they did wasn't really against policy. Could you provide diffs that demonstrate the correlation between users. You could open another SPI linked to thunderpilot if you believe they are all the same user. NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Myself and others keep having to fix their lack of indents on Talk pages[8]...a trait all the questionable accounts share in common, beginning with Thunderpilot. Not sure what's going on, probably socking, possibly meatpuppets, but they are creating an impression of a lot of different and sometimes conflicting opinions on the Talk page. At the moment, it's more annoying than anything. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

SPI Archive

When you archive an SPI case, as you did here, aren't you supposed to leave behind some pointer to the archive page? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:58, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

{{SPIpriorcases}} should do that automatically. It's working for me, after I cleared my cache. It wasn't working for me initially though, as you pointed out. NativeForeigner ^Talk 19:03, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it's up to date now. Sorry for the noise. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for looking at it. NativeForeigner ^Talk 19:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars Interview: What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:27, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/IbankingMM

Hi, you closed the latest investigation by responding that User:Wordsindustry was a duck, but didn't flag that account as such. In other words, Wordsindustry is not currently listed as a confirmed sock of IbankingMM. I feel that since Words was blocked for making legal threats, there should be some formal linkage should lifting IbankingMM's block be considered in the future. Does this make sense? — Brianhe (talk) 00:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done NativeForeigner ^Talk 01:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Camellia Plant

Regarding the SPI you recently handled involving Camellia Plant, an IP has now posted on the AfD claiming to be him. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For cleaning up one of the biggest redirect webs I've ever seen Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. NativeForeigner ^Talk 23:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter

We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! 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 reduce 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK RfC

• As a listed DYK participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions00:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

unblock of Fabrizio111

Any objections to unblocking Fabrizio111 (talk · contribs)? He seems to agree to all proposed restrictions, and the follow up answers (in Italian) seem to indicate understanding of the issues, presuming Google Translate is up to par. Kuru (talk) 15:54, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

No, none at all. NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:11, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Understood and thanks. Kuru (talk) 00:24, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Atlético Belén

Hi. I have a request. I nominated Atlético Belén a few years ago for deletion. The resulting move was delete. However, I failed to realize that Atlético Belén had played in the First Division of Peru in 1989 which, over at WP:FOOTY, satisfies the criteria for general notability. If I had known that it played in the First Division, I wouldn't have nominated it for deletion along the other clubs. Can you please undelete it? Thanks, MicroX (talk) 05:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure thing. NativeForeigner ^Talk 06:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, Atlético Lusitania was also deleted in that list but it satisfies WP:FOOTY's criteria for general notability as it competed in the Peruvian Segunda Division (professional league). --MicroX (talk) 01:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done NativeForeigner ^Talk 08:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Another move by Angela3339

Angela3339 is moving pages again. That one in particular, together with the page history, makes me think there may be more going on than is obvious, possibly socking. Thoughts? Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, good call. I blocked both accounts to prevent further disruption, I'm trying to get a checkuser to look at it right now. NativeForeigner ^Talk 06:42, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Blocked sockpuppet

Hello, according to my watchlist, a recently investigated and then blocked User:Oh Yeaaahh has made a lot of edits to the articles about Athens Metro, and I am considering hand-reverting edits of blocked sockpuppets back to other versions as per WP:EVADE. How do I get approval to start this procedure? Thanks. --Marianian^(talk) 18:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:EVASION you already have it. Thanks for doing so. NativeForeigner ^Talk 19:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Cheers, although I do not think this is going to be a one-user task given the scope of the user's edits – some legit edits are sandwiched between them. Luckily we now have this to track. --Marianian^(talk) 19:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Your self-revert

Um, I wouldn't want to presume your intentions, but does your self-revert indicate that you change your mind and think a rangeblock might be appropriate, or merely that you finally wish not to comment on this case? I don't mean to squeeze it out of you or anything, apologies if you'd rather be left alone. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 23:42, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

In response to your query ...

I have several fish in various stages of frying but my largest project in the immediate future is an article based on de:Anthropomorphe Pfahlgötter, the English title of which is problematic :-) I also need to do at least one major academic journal, rework and greatly expand Thingspiele (matter of finding the time to concentrate), rewrite Dísir (problem getting hold of a vital article), there are some woeful stubs in the area of German film and at least one mess regarding duplicated articles on German silent films (for the silent films, book access problem causing me to hold off), and I'm involved in the rewrite of Odin and have stuff I should add to Thor ... then there are all the redlinks calling to me (see pretty much any of my articles; þættir and architects especially, although there is also one architect I need to fix, German Bestelmeyer). Yes, my user page gives a fair impression; I work on a lot of different things, and work too slowly to fill in the gaps. Fortunately others sometimes do it for me; someone did Palas, for example, which had been on my mental list for a while. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Very interesting. Thank you!!

ygm

you have what should be rather interesting email. Kevin Gorman (talk) 00:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed sock blanking their user talk page

Hi, I noticed that a confirmed sock, User:Fred newman has blanked their talk page, including the resolution of their SPI. I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to remove the sock puppet templates from your user talk page per WP:BLANKING (though I'm aware you can delete mostly anything else you would like). Honestly, though, I feel like I've been fighting this guy, his sock puppetry, and disruptive editing so much that I no longer have a NPOV in reference to the user himself. Since you were the editor who dealt with placing the sock templates, I figured I'd pass the buck a bit and get you to do/not do whatever is needed. Thanks for all of your help. NewAccount4Me (talk) 22:04, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, had something come up last minute this past weekend. GregJackP took care of it, thanks to him. NativeForeigner ^Talk 07:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Mahek faldu

I see at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mahek faldu/Archive that you wrote "Two other accounts are blocked." Can you say what two other accounts? JamesBWatson (talk) 20:10, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Looking at my blocklog, I meant the two listed non-master accounts. Sorry, that was very unclear in retrospect. NativeForeigner ^Talk 21:49, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Pumpie

Hello NF! Seeing as you handled the previous SPI case on Pumpie (talk · contribs), could you please help expedite this one? Da Desirer 2 (talk · contribs) fits WP:DUCK criteria to an iota, including, regrettably, his industriousness in creating horribly mis-translated articles which have to be cleaned up afterwards... --Constantine ✍ 16:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done Whole situation is entirely regrettable. NativeForeigner ^Talk 17:31, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

1. Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
2. Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
3. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
4. Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
5. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
6. Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
7. Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
8. Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: 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 reduce 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:55, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Drummer sockpuppet

It probably would be wise to indefinite Drummer's block. Using Porter's account, he's insisting he's not a puppet, so I would suspect there will be more accounts made. Rusted AutoParts 05:34, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm aware. I've requested CheckUser which should flush out additional accounts. If there are more I'll indef block, but with only what we've seen I'll err on the conservative side and wait for a checkuser to action the case. NativeForeigner ^Talk 07:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I don't know if it was an error on Rusted and my part when we submitted the request, but TreCoolGuy was the master, and then Drummer, Porter, the IP, and any others were the puppet. I don't know if this changes any thinking on your part, but I just noticed from your wording on Drummer's page, we may have got it wrong in labeling who was the master and who were the puppets. Thank you for your help in this case. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

CheckUser analysis done after 14 days

Hi NativeForeigner

On 14 August you requested that CheckUser be run on some accounts who I believed were sockpuppetrs fo DeFacto. CheckUser was run on these accounts two weeks after you requested it. At the same time fresh evidence has emerged linking User:FishGF to a banned user, possibly User:DeFacto (though CheckUser is unable to find a link). Are you able to revisit the SPI request and complete the investigation?

Regards Martinvl (talk) 14:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

ACC acct request

ACC request has been made. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

CheckUser again?

See also: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pumpie

Please check the history at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Athens_International_Airport_station&diff=571509720&oldid=531105050. I'm suspicious that Artishert (talk · contribs) seems to be like Oh Yeaaahh (talk · contribs) for adding unproven station codes. --Marianian^(talk) 06:12, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/117.198.35.137

What sort of expiry time is that, and how is the IP still blocked despite the block having expired 43 years ago? Ginsuloft (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

That was pretty funny, I went ahead and filed bugzilla:53907. Legoktm (talk) 09:24, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 16:55, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXXX, September 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the American Civil War

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Abaut Sockpuppet investigations:

Please read the answer in this article: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AkaiGoth & DDragonNk --ByaAkai (talk) 16:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, NativeForeigner. You have new messages at Benlisquare's talk page.
Message added 17:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--benlisquare_T•C•E 17:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter

In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Sasata (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

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 reduce 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

TreCoolGuy sockpuppeting....again.

Investigation here. Rusted AutoParts 04:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

User R.stickler

Hi Native Foreigner,

R.stickler is continuing to edit on his Talk Page, (just as Deafcto did). Would you please extend his ban to match that of DeFacto's - ie no editing anywhere in Wikipedia. Martinvl (talk) 07:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Referred him to BASC NativeForeigner ^Talk 07:57, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Socks

User:Vigyani has just unearthed an article Rick Paul posted by YanKha which is virtually identical to one posted by 12Zemba whom you blocked as part of a sock farm thought to be Aviation geek. Looks like this is one to add to the list. I'm not sure whether to SPI YanKha as a sock of 12Zemba or Aviation geek, in view of your comment there. Or to leave it to you as the expert... Peridon (talk) 15:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Somebody should take the oldest sock I found in the latest case and probably so a split, but I'm extremely busy right now. That being said an extremely quick check indicated that they certainly aren't in the same geographical editing although it is certainly possible it's still paid editing or meat. NativeForeigner ^Talk 16:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks socking/meat. Another new user comes with first and only edit to defend the article.--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 00:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Definitely meat if one of the two. NativeForeigner ^Talk 04:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks Austro-Hungarian battleships of World War I Op-ed: Advice on reviewing Featured and A-Class articles

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:33, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Recent block - can we assume good faith?

Hi, A recent user you blocked, User talk:Sphere1994, has contested the fact they are a sockpuppet. As you said at the SPI " Inconclusive but evidence wise is very solid", would it be possible to WP:AGF on this case, or not? The user has come up with a seemingly good reason for the edits on their talk. --Mdann52talk to me! 07:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. NativeForeigner ^Talk

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. NativeForeigner ^Talk

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. NativeForeigner ^Talk

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
2. Hawkeye7 (submissions)
3. Sasata (submissions)
4. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
5. Casliber (submissions)
6. Adam Cuerden (submissions)
7. Miyagawa (submissions)
8. Piotrus (submissions)
9. Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

• Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
• Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
• Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
• Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
• Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
• The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
• Finally, the judges are awarding Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Titan's Cross nomination

As you are listed as a member of Operation Majestic Titan, you are receiving this message to notify you that a new Titan's Cross nomination has been opened. You are therefore cordially invited to iVote or offer your opinion on the nomination. Sincerely, TomStar81 (Talk) 05:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCII, November 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at US industry in World War II Op-ed: AustralianRupert offers a soldier's perspective on editing Wikipedia

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Recent socks

Hey, there. I noticed that you helped out at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrwallace05. I was wondering if the CU can be compared to the most recent one for indef blocked User:Plant's Strider. I think they are likely the same person. Also, we have been chasing around IPs from Toronto, Roger's Cable. Is there any chance a connection can be made between these most recent socks and Roger's Cable. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Rangeblock question

Hi NativeForeigner, I just made three range blocks (1, 2, and 3) to try to deal with a persistent vandal. If you have time, do you think you could check my work? Do they need to be modified at all? See here for more background. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:27, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Looks good. The collateral is better than I would have expected. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Glad to hear that. Can't wait to vote in a few hours :) Mark Arsten (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote

Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis

Sock

Hello, I hope you are well! An old acquaintance is back and quacking as loud as usual. A swift block would be appreciated before he once again leaves us with dozens of "articles". Thank you in advance. Constantine ✍ 17:29, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Impact control

I just struck out unverifiable station codes from 21 Athens Metro articles in one fell swoop. Please advise me on how Wikipedia can protect Athens Metro articles from future Pumpie socks (example: when the anonymous "Global Cash Dinar" vandal took on Yugoslavia money-related articles for a year, the solution was WP:PENDING). Thanks in advance. --Marianian^(talk) 00:19, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Pending may be the answer. I've watchlistested a ton of them, so hopefully I'll be able to spot the trend. In general it should be easy to prevent so long as somebody brings it over to SPI. It's a lot more manageable from our end than when the Dinar vandal was about. That being said if it occurs again in the next month or so I'd consider applying pending changes protection. NativeForeigner ^Talk 08:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Precious

images and military history
Thank you for quality contributions to articles such as USS Washington (BB-56) and Mo Tae-bum, for uploading excellent images and service on the Commons, for seeing the possibility of good faith, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (16 May 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:07, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot :) NativeForeigner ^Talk 08:49, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome! It was so refreshing to read the term "good faith" in connection with the case which mentioned it only twice ("Thank you! Did you know that you were the first to mention "AGF" on that page? The only other time it said "AGF is simply not appropriate here — unfortunately we have assume the worst.") ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jxlathan

Hi NativeForeigner--could you please put the link to the archived case, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jxlathan/Archive, in there? I don't know how to file that paperwork. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

It should automatically show up. I'll keep an eye on it, it seems like we've been having more glitches with the template recently. I don't have a good fix but if it doesn't resolve I'll see if I can get someone more well versed in templates to assist. NativeForeigner ^Talk 17:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

More glitches--just what we need. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 18:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Tell me about it... NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Is this where you tell me you broke the ArbCom elections? Doh! Drmies (talk) 18:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

This is the part where I was scared that they were broken, thankfully they aren't... NativeForeigner ^Talk 18:40, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Suspicions

Could you have a look at User:MrRatermat2 who is posting a lot at AfD? First edit was yesterday. Reminds me of someone, but I've no idea who. Peridon (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

It reminds me of 2-3 sockmasters. I cannot place which one. I went ahead and ran a check but found nothing of use. NativeForeigner ^Talk 00:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I see he's listing AfD discussions now - I don't even know how to do that! <8-( Peridon (talk) 12:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIII, December 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Carcharoth and Hawkeye7 look at World War I cemeteries and the British Army in World War II Interview: Less-represented areas of military history – part 2 Op-ed: TomStar81 and Nick-D look back on 2013 and ahead to 2014

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Just checking

Greetings. Per this check, is Kobayashi245 a confirmed sockpuppet of Mikemikev? Thanks. — ArtifexMayhem (talk) 03:39, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

No, they are unlikely to be. I phrased it exceedingly poorly. I just ran a check on Artifex, they are unrelated. NativeForeigner ^Talk 03:44, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

You just ran a check on me? — ArtifexMayhem (talk) 03:47, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I checked Kobayashi, I"m tired. I did not check you. :/ I'm extremely sorry for the confusion. NativeForeigner ^Talk 03:49, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

It's all good. Get some sleep (naps are good too). Thanks for the clarification. — ArtifexMayhem (talk) 03:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

That's the plan. Thanks for the understanding. NativeForeigner ^Talk 03:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on the Australian Army in Somalia Review essay: Hog Farm on American Civil War sites in the South and Midwest

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)