User talk:78.26/archive2016-2

Three years ago ...
music
	... you were recipient; no. 514 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

Henry King (musician)

I don't know if you saw my comments on the talk page, or whether you think some of them can be incorporated into the article. It's always a problem with these more obscure people as to whether primary sources and less reliable (but probably uncontentious) sources should be included, so I'll leave it to you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:12, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Henry King (musician)

On 4 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Henry King (musician), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Henry King, the bandleader of the Burns and Allen radio program, received special dispensation for his marriage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Henry King (musician). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Henry King (musician)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:18, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

Hello 78.26, I have a problem while putting colors on text and background. Can u Please help me to know the code of different colors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiger Gang (talk • contribs) 09:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tiger Gang. You might try Help:Wiki_markup#Coloring_and_highlighting_text, but I'm really not the expert you're looking for. If this doesn't show what you're looking for, you might try Wikipedia:Help desk. I hope that's helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

..Thanks for your suggestion. Tiger Gang (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for the kind note regarding work on the record labels. I'm a beginner trying to make not an overwhelming number of mistakes. Much to learn, though, much to read in the documentation.
Vmavanti (talk) 03:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NEM KOSAL

Hi, thanks for acting on that CSD tag. The author has just re-created it again, unfortunately. It wouldn't be so bad if he wasn't just copying in text or infoboxes from other articles, then after a few minutes, deleting it all and copying in from another article. I tried to get him to use his sandbox for this, to no avail. Crow^Caw 16:34, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be a completely non-notable person trying to create an article about himself, using existing articles as templates. Perhaps he is confusing Wikipedia with linkedin or facebook. If this gets created again, it should be deleted and salted, methinks. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Crow:, I'm going to be truly offline for awhile. Thanks for all your diligence on this. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:03, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any time, thanks for your repeated eyes on this up to now! Crow^Caw 17:06, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from Waqar Ahmed92

Thanks you for contacting to with me on my talk page, can you guide me something, first i want tell me how to talk on talk page. and i am update and some edits can you check my work? Thanks Regard Waqar Ahmed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waqar Ahmed92 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

replied on editor's talk page. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi from MML Ruler

Hi. You might remember me as the newbie who made unconstructive edits. I'm really sorry about that. Anyway, I want to make an article about Tyler Pappas aka Logdotzip but I'm it may get deleted really fast. Can you help me? I know you could, since you're an admin. Thanks. Bye!--MML Ruler (talk) 15:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MML Ruler, thanks for dropping by and writing. Your best bet is to start the article in the Draft namespace area. This will allow you some time to develop it without fear of it being immediately deleted. When you have done so, let me know and I'll be happy to come over and take a look at it. If you have questions, you know how to reach me! All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for telling me what not to do, after I made some unconstructive edits, and being as kind enough as not blocking me since I was new. Thanks 78.26! MML Ruler (talk) 15:18, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why, thank you! You're more than welcome, and I look forward to seeing all the articles you have written and/or improved. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks 78.26 again!

	Best Admin Ever Award
	Thanks again for being an awesome admin. MML Ruler (talk) 17:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Page

Hi,

I saw that you removed a recent created page. What specifically can I do improve this article. Rwhanco (talk) 14:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rwhanco, thanks for writing. I will try to state this gently, but the page in your user area was deleted because it was blatant advertising. Statements such as "Our original software product" have no place in an encyclopedia, not even in user spaces where much greater latitude is given. Before you re-create this, please read our notability standards, and review WP:NPOV and WP:NOTADVERTISING. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are bored and like sock puzzles

Hello my friend! See here for a string of accounts I blocked. (Do you have that script that makes blocked usernames appear in pale, italic, strikethrough?) If you are bored and good at puzzles, please feel free to give your opinion on who is tied to who. Their registration times and edits tell a tale, but it is inconclusive to me. If you have something better to do, do that better thing. :) Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not good at this type of thing (see my RfA), but I'll try to have a go at this tonight (like plain oatmeal, it will be good for me), as this will take some in-depth comparisons, so I can tell my Quack from my Qvack. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And really, it is fine to pass on this one. It may just be wee meatpups messing about and just a bit of watchlisting and reverting could handle it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anna Frodesiak: in my oh-so-wise and experienced opinion, Jade sone9, 209.171.88.222, and Kpoparina are the same editor. It seems highly unlikely that even meatpuppets would stick to adding exactly the same information. I've seen groups disrupt articles in a coordinated manner before, but they usually have different ways of doing it. This editor is insistent that the subject is of Native American and European descent. Too specific. 115.178.26.170 and previously reverted editors within the last 10 days are not the same editor. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it, until given the slightest shred of evidence otherwise, ahem. Helpful? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And what do you think of this? Is YurisFatass Jade sone9? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:42, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, trending towards likely, but I'm not sure. I don't understand K-Pop, J-Pop, or what motivates the fanbase. Is ethnicity (particularly a variant from the norm) an important part of the group member's biography to them? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I don't follow it either. But, my guess is that the fans are quite connected. Maybe this is a social media collusion or maybe just some blog or website that raised the heritage thing and unrelated people all came here to make changes. Anyhow, thanks so much for checking. Sorry to bother you with this one. I will keep an eye on the articles and hopefully won't have to protect. And if you're wondering why I blocked so fast with such little warning, it is because buried vandalism is such a pain. I compensated with personal notes offering a trade of an explanation for an unblock. No takers. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think your actions are, as usual, exemplary. If I were to see a similar edit on a K-Pop article, I would do exactly the same, at this point. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:58, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are too kind. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel

I took the liberty of doing what I thought you were trying to do. To hide something, you need to revdel all the revisions in which it was contained. BethNaught (talk) 21:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was afraid of that, was hoping to do it in such a way to (publicly) preserve the edit history of everyone else. Thanks much, you are always most welcome here! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:02, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	HOOD UP SHREET FAMLIEY JOHNNYGAUMOND 07:31, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Request on 15:16:42, 4 August 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by JDoober

JDoober (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Celia Kaye (brand) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello,

I was wondering if you had any suggestions for my article, whether it be more third party sources or suggestions on how to fix my language so it's acceptable. I'm open to any and all comments! Thanks!

Jdoober

JDoober (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you definitely need more third party sources, but not any third-party source can or should be used to establish notability. Please read identifying reliable sources. I can hardly emphasize enough how much you need to change the tone of your draft. A sentence like "CeliaKaye.com is a resource for the most current, user-friendly and family-friendly information available" should appear as promotional even to the most biased toward the product. Almost every sentence within the draft is slanted towards to topic, rather than being written in a disinterested, dispassionate tone. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:09, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Juozas Ambrazevičius

Hello,

I did change a page (merge of original and my text) but changes were deleted since there was a question of copyright ? How to write my own text (no copyright) and merge it with the original text ? Or do I have to sart a new topic with the same name ? Write a new chapter ? Re-write the total chapter in my own words and thus delete (part of) the original text ? I'm a bit confused.

Thanks for your help ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piet snotterbel (talk • contribs) 16:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Piet. Thanks for writing. I'm sorry this has been confusing to you, but don't give up! You need to figure out what from that source you want to add to the article, that is not already in the article. Then you need to add that information, but it has to be in your own words, the wording can't be copied from the source, because it violates copyright laws in various jurisdictions which will expose both yourself and Wikipedia to potential lawsuit, and we don't want that! So if the source says "Mary was the possessor of a dimunitative juvenile Ovis aries, the reflective qualities of it's coat was similar to that of water in frozen crystalline form" you could write this in your own words, i.e. "Mary had a little lamb, it's fleece was white as snow." I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:19, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK I understand what you mean, but if the text that was deleted is already my own text ? How can I certify this ? If I didn't publish it elsewhere, how to prove it's mine ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piet snotterbel (talk • contribs) 16:49, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to admit I might not be able to help. How long ago did you add the wording to Wikipedia, that was recently deleted? Do you have any theories as to how the website acquired your wording for its own use? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Penske PC-12

Hello,

I'm requesting that you can do lots of reseach of the PC-12 please? 92.21.252.120 (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 92.21.252.120. (May I enthusiastically invite you to create an account?). I'm willing to help on the article, but although I'm an auto-racing fan, my focus tends to be on music articles. Do you have access to a library with some books on the history of open-wheel racing in the United States? I found the article compelling, regarding the reason for this model's discontinuance. I'm going to also add your draft to a couple of wikipedia projects, and perhaps some other editors more familiar with the subject will be able to help you out. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:12, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Penske PC-12

Hello, I spotted your ES at the PC-12 page. Unfortunately this is not a new editor but one that has been disruptive of Wiki Project F1 articles over the past year and has now moved on to Indy Cars. His creations are usually badly written, fail notability (as I feel this one does) and are frequently found to be copy-vios. He has no concept of any sort of guidelines and will remove any advice or warnings (and maintenance templates) which he doesn't like or understand. He has used approximately 150 IPs in the last year but has also recently created an account. Best of luck if you try to help him out! Eagleash (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

hi 78.26, just to let you know that an article that you deleted has an afd running at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liv Morgan match statistics.

Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake in the edit summary (didn't check what the bot gave me). I didn't delete the article (the AfD is running its course), I deleted the re-direct. Thanks for kitten, I'm a cat person. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:22, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:03:45, 23 September 2016 review of submission by Mannyadebayo

Mannyadebayo (talk · contribs)
- User:Mannyadebayo/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

What about this link? http://rccgcanada.org/parish-directory/675/the-lords-cedar/

Directory listings do not help establish notability. Please see WP:N. Notability, outside outstanding circumstances, is presumed when there are multiple, independent, reliable sources which provide in-depth coverage about the topic. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:09, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:08:17, 23 September 2016 review of submission by Mannyadebayo

Mannyadebayo (talk · contribs)
- User:Mannyadebayo/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Ehm what about http://www.vanguardngr.com/2016/08/rccg-64th-annual-convention-pastor-kalejaiye-oyitso-others-promoted/

That is not about the congregation your proposed article is about, that is about a denomination, and only gives brief passing mention about your topic, not in-depth coverage. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:11, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:13:13, 23 September 2016 review of submission by Mannyadebayo

Mannyadebayo (talk · contribs)
- User:Mannyadebayo/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Okay but in https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Lakewood_Church it says the same thing

Not at all. Look at all the sources that are independent of the topic contained in that article. Irrespective of that, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)}

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, 78.26. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Arkansas Woodchopper

I was trying to edit Arkie the Arkansas Woodchopper and the autocorrect changed it to Artie the Arkansas Woodchopper. I couldn't get it to fix it. Can you help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolverine74 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wolverine74, I moved the page back to "Arkansas Woodchopper", essentially undoing your page move. How is he usually referred to on records, news, sheet music, etc? If you truly want to move it to "Arkie the Arkansas Woodchopper" perhaps you should explain your reasoning on the talk page. If you run into the same problems again, let me know and we'll get it taken care of. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:15:13, 4 October 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by J.rodz01

J.rodz01 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Sideshow Mel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, my article for Sideshow Mel was rejected because it was almost a copy of an article I was using as a template for it and I submitted it because I wanted other people to help me with this, but now I am unsure what to do. Thanks and I hope you can help me. J.rodz01 (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

J.rodz01 (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi J.rodz01. First, delete all the material that is not related to Sideshow Mel. Then find sources about your subject. I'll bet some of the sources that give information about Sideshow Bob also talk about Sideshow Mel. I would recommend you read your first article and WP:Referencing for Beginners. Another idea is to ask for assistance with your draft at Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:54, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet Records

Should be a dab page and a couple of short stubs, wouldn't you say? Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed splitting the article some time ago. However, I'm not sure about a dab page because the Nashville version, sought after by collectors with the exception of the 1000 series (i.e. "Near You"), is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in my view. But anything would be better than the current version. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm fine with that - I hadn't checked the talk page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:00, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or should the material be deleted as unsourced? I was able to confirm the information about the British version, but only through casual mention, I couldn't find in-depth coverage that would support an independent article. Since heavy-metal isn't my thing, I probably don't know the proper places to look. The Peabo-Bryson material is already is already in the Bang Records article, and a dab notice could be placed on top of the article, something like "for the 1970s Bang Records subsidiary, see:" Thoughts? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is this page... and a Discogs page here, if you want to use that. On a (slightly) related matter....

Do you know anything about Gilt-Edge Records, which I believe was a subsidiary of 4 Star Records - though it's not mentioned in that article. I've seen Gilt-Edge mentioned as an early independent label that released the first records by Cecil Gant... but I'm not sure it really counts as an "independent". Any ideas? Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's enough for an article, probably with the Google Books source I found. Regarding Gilt-Edge, I have several records. For some interesting information, see [1]. However, this is the re-start of Gilt-Edge. I don't think the first version was directly related to 4-Star, but because the labels of both versions are so very similar, there has to at least be some close ties (something along the lines of Richard Nelson started Gilt-Edge in 1943, and it was folded into 4-Star when that label was started, and issues on Gilt-Edge then ceased, until 4-Star re-started it as a subsidiary. Please note that I'm making this up by way of example). 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:21, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Padmavati (film)

Hello, I noticed that you deleted the article saying that "Please delete for move from recent AFC-published Padmavati (2017 film)". I was the first to create the article on the topic. So the credit of creating the article on the topic should go to me. Please move the content of Padmavati (2017 film) to Padmavati (film) and redirect Padmavati (2017 film) to Padmavati (film). Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 12:41, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Smart LION

Done. I also restored the deleted edits so you would appear as the article creator. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:31, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Björn Ottersten

Hello! I saw you just deleted Björn Ottersten. Thank you! I wanted to see if you could also protect the page. It has been created 3 times in the past 10 days. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:03, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zackmann08

Done... but there is one good source for the topic, see [2]. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi, thanks "talk:78.26 for your warm and belated welcome. It is perfectly fine even if it is "belated", and I am very grateful that you have contacted me. Zyvov 02:32, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Re: 180.191.111.224

Please look at the history of Liv and Maddie and Volvo-related articles. This has been a long-term problem for a long time, causing blocks and page protections when reported. They deserve no more warnings and have been reported before with no warnings and action was taken. Thanks. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:31, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amaury, this needs to be reported at WP:SPI, (possibly WP:RFPP), not AIV, because AIV is not set up to handle the kind of evidence you are presenting. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:36, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, they've been reported to AIV by me and others plenty of times before, and administrators blocked them without issue. But no worries. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:03, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt it, and if they knew the background (I didn't) they had every right to do so. Since your message to me I checked the contributions for that IP, and that address has done nothing further. That's the problem with IP-hopping vandals, blocking doesn't really help except for range-blocks. If this has been going on for a long time, perhaps adding to WP:LTA and then referencing it in the AIV report would help. Thanks for your time and explanations. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2016 November newsletter: Final results

The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:

First Place - Cas Liber (submissions)
Second Place - MPJ-DK (submissions)
Third Place - Adam Cuerden (submissions)

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a three-way tie with themselves for two FAs in each of R2, R3, and R5).
Good Article – MPJ-DK had 14 GAs promoted in R3.
Featured List – Calvin999 (submissions) produced 2 FLs in R2
Featured Pictures – Adam Cuerden restored 18 images to FP status in R4.
Featured Portal – SSTflyer (submissions) produced the only FPO of the Cup in R2.
Featured Topic – Cyclonebiskit (submissions) and Calvin were each responsible for one FT in R3 and R2, respectively.
Good Topic – MPJ-DK created a GT with 9 GAs in R5.
Did You Know – MPJ-DK put 53 DYKs on the main page in R4.
In The News – Dharmadhyaksha (submissions) and Muboshgu (submissions), each with 5 ITN, both in R4.
Good Article Review – MPJ-DK completed 61 GARs in R2.

Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email)

Error

You might have intended to restore what the previous admin did as user:Dino-Dollar but the block period is still the same.

@CLCStudent: Egads, what a mess I made. Thanks, fixed. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:37, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup

Greetings, all!

We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time.

The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring.

Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now!

If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges.

Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for welcomeEricPfromTustin (talk) 17:38, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taito X System article

Hey there, I've proposed a deletion for the page Taito X System. The reason for this is that, the article is confused with another hardware page of Taito (called Taito Type X), but more importantly, the proposed deletion has not been objected by anyone. The proposed deletion that I placed states that, "The article may be deleted if this message remains in place for seven days, i.e., after 17:25, 10 November 2016 (UTC)". It's been over the proposed limit and nobody has deleted the page. Would you be able to delete it? It's a sparse article that lacks enough information to be a valued article. I originally said this to XYZSpaniel but she clarified that she wasn't an administrator. Thanks. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 11:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Iftekharahmed96:

Done 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate your help and support. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 12:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi 78.26,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of page

Hi 78.26, I requested the deletion of the article DeepTouchSA under "Db-person" because the subject is not notable nor does the article show otherwise. The problem is they keep removing the speedy deletion tag. Could you look into the article yourself and decide. Thank You Xdigionwiki (talk) 20:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Xdigionwiki: It is at Articles for Deletion now, so I'd prefer to let it play out. I have little doubt regarding the outcome of the discussion. Thanks for the notice, if they remove the AfD template at the page again, I'll block. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi 78.26.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review needs your help

Hi 78.26,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	goood Wtc12 (talk) 16:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, 78.26. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thank you. I really don't know what I'm doing. Just winging it unsigned comment by Pbez2bass

replied at user's talk page. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Clarence Ditlow

On 2 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clarence Ditlow, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Clarence Ditlow was recommended for a consumer advocacy job because he was a wrestler? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clarence Ditlow. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Clarence Ditlow), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

104.255.146.2

Hey,

Just stumbled upon this IP's edits, and I was a bit curious here. But did you take this IP's block log into account when performing this block? It appears to be the same editor that continued their disruption immediately after their previous 1 month block. 2607:FB90:7811:83B5:0:4F:6C82:D601 (talk) 21:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@2607:FB90:7811:83B5:0:4F:6C82:D601: Thanks, not really. In fact, there were no block notices on his talk page (nor any removed), so I didn't catch that. Not highly convinced I should extend the block further, mostly on a technicality of lack of warnings, but if editor/address vandalizes soon after the block expires I'll re-block for an extended period. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:50, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you unblock?

I was auto blocked by Material Scientest because an account with whom I have no connection to was vandalising pages. I can't ask him to remove it, as it does not let me add a discussion due to the format of his talk page. So I came here to ask if you could remove it instead.

Thanks.

Potatoboy23 (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Potatoboy23: If you were blocked, then you couldn't post here. If this isn't the account that was blocked, then you are socking, and this account should be immediately blocked. Please self-disclose, and request an unblock with your original account. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually no, this is my only account. The reason I was able to post is because of an unexplained gap in the block. Anyway, it has expired now, but thanks anyway.

Potatoboy23 (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the issue is or ever was. I checked your block log, and you were never blocked by Materialscientist (a better editor and admin than I am) at all. In fact, your block log is clean. I'm rather at a loss how I can or could have helped you, but if you are concerned about actions which might get you blocked, I'll bend over backward to help you avoid them. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:15, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Must have been a error within Wikipedia systems, cause I couldn't edit at all due to a block message appearing if I tried. I don't think that I have made any actions that will get get me blocked, but if I do, I'll be sure to come here to ask you for help.

Also, you helped by providing pieces to a puzzle so that I could work it out.

Thanks, Potatoboy23 (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

:nom-nom-nom.

78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No editing!

Stop! You have exactly 39,000 edits. You can retire now. Its all over. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 13:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DatGuy: OK, I'll stop now, at exactly 39,000.... oops. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You seem like a Will. God dammit Will.

Automated creation of drafts at AfC

I'm not intending to approve any more of Sander.v.Ginkel's articles at AfC until this AN/I discussion concludes. AfC has a significant backlog as it is and can't be expected to police someone's automated submissions. We need to focus on assisting new editors who generally need help contributing to Wikipedia. Just thought I'd let you know, as you're in it too. Bradv 18:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

please help how to submit

I am unable to under stand you following massage please let me know modification I can do that thanks.\ \ Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 78.26 was: This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Additionally, the article is written as a promotional piece towards the subject, violating WP:NPOV. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

   If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Thirubotla/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
   If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
   You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thirubotla (talk • contribs)

Thirubotla I'm not sure what to say. You need to understand the WP:Notability guidelines. Is your topic notable enough that multiple independent, reliable sources are giving in-depth coverage of the topic? Also, the article needs to be written in a neutral manner, it should not try to make the subject of the article appear "good" or "bad" (but of course discussions of the "goodness" or "badness" of the topic by independent sources can and often should be included, but a concerted effort should be made to include diverse viewpoints). I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:39, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sinners and Saints Records

My thing is fine calm down I'm tryna do my article and would appreciate it if you would let me work. Logandillon (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logandillon if you can demonstrate notability, I'll be happy to self-decline the speedy myself. If you want time to work on it at a slower pace, would you like it moved into the draft area, where you can work on it at your leisure until the article is ready for mainspace? All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:07, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

	'Merry Christmas 78.26!!
	Hi 78.26, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia! –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 01:58, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 December 2016

Year in review: Looking back on 2016

News and notes: Strategic planning update; English ArbCom election results

Special report: German ArbCom implodes

In focus: Active user page filter prevents vandalism and harassment

Op-ed: Operation successful, patient dead: Outreach workshops in Namibia

In the media: In brief: Coverage of gender gap initiatives, banner fundraising, and more

Featured content: The Christmas edition

Technology report: Labs improvements impact 2016 Tool Labs survey results

Traffic report: Post-election traffic blues

Blog: Wiki Loves Monuments contest winners announced

Recent research: One study and several abstracts

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 19:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A question for you

Today I received a message that said, "Your user rights were changed. You have been added to: ‪Rollbackers‬, ‪Autopatrolled‬. Trusted user, with long history of solid contribution: doesn't need to be patrolled." It contained a link to here. I take the wording as a compliment, but I don't know what it means otherwise. Am I supposed to do anything different from what I have been doing on Wikipedia? Eddie Blick (talk) 19:18, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddie, great to hear from you! Yes, this is a good thing. What this means is that any article you created is automatically marked as "patrolled" in the new pages log, so you won't have a cadre of editors looking at your new creations to see if they should be speedily deleted. On the other hand it means that if you are looking for another pair of eyes to look over you work, you won't get it unless you ask for it, probably. This user-right is overdue in my opinion, if I had thought if it I would have given it to you myself, but I've never poked around that area of my admin toolset. Happy holidays, and may the new year bring you many more interesting subjects to write about! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:51, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate the clarification. I enjoy working on articles for Wikipedia (both editing existing articles and creating new ones). I also appreciate the help that you have given me since I began this venture approximately three years ago. Especially in my early days on Wikipedia, you were so helpful in giving me pointers and helping me adjust to expectations for WP activities. I wish you a merry Christmas and a happy new year. Eddie Blick (talk) 20:08, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

	Happy Holidays!
	Hi, 78.26! Have a happy and safe season, and a blessed new year! Holiday cheers, --Discographer (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.
Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) 00:53, 25 December 2016 (UTC)|Legobot]] (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 19:53, 25 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

User:Jennepicfoundation

Hi, 78! I was surprised to see you block User:Jennepicfoundation as a username violation. Several of us (myself and User:Ritchie333) have been working with this user for more than a year and felt her name was within guidelines. If she was using just "epicfoundation" as her username, then I agree it would be a violation since it implies not only representation but shared use. But by indicating her own name, Jenn, she distinguishes herself as an individual. Per Username policy, "However, usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person, such as "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "Jack Smith at the XY Foundation", "WidgetFan87", etc."

As for her COI, she has declared her COI from the beginning and we are on it. She has crossed the line a few times and in fact is currently at ANI for a possible topic ban. So that brings up another problem: with this block she will be unable to respond there. Give it some thought. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 18:15, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN thank you for the note. It appears I am in error, as I misread "Jenn" as being part of the foundation name. I will unblock (if some enlightened individual has not already done so.) 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:51, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! She's in enough trouble with the COI thing; glad we got this other issue worked out! 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 19:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Good effort! Zyvov 03:55, 29 December 2016 (UTC)