User talk:Another Believer/Archive 31

The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
• Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
• The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
• Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
• Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Hog Farm with 801, Kingsif with 719, SounderBruce with 710, Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

• Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
• Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
• A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
• A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

• The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
• Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

As is normal I have placed the Award on the talk page of the recipient (usually an individual). We EDDY clerks would love for all your members to be aware of their deserved "pat on the back". Soon I will be adding a banner to go along with the Award. Maybe members can display the banner on their talk page. ―Buster7 ☎ 15:45, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Great, thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 11:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on The Alaska Triangle requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. HeartGlow30797 (talk) 05:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

The article Batts Hall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable academic building.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. User:Namiba 03:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Attached is a copy of a mass message that was sent out back in 2016. The EOTW cupboard is down to 3. I wonder if I could trouble you to send out a new mailing. Yours is one of the few names I recognized on the list of mass mailers. P[ease use Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week#Members as the mailing list. Thanks!―Buster7 ☎ 22:51, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Buster7, Thanks, but I'm not actually too familiar with the activities of EOTW so I'm not sure I should be the one who sends a mass message. I think you can submit a request at Wikipedia:Mass message senders, though. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok Thanks, I just didn't know what door to knock on ―Buster7 ☎ 23:10, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
• The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

• A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

Hello! I just wanted to tell you that I have a current Featured Article nomination, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bikini Porn/archive1. If you have time to leave some comments there, it would be really appreciated. Thank you. Regards! --Paparazzzi (talk) 00:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Paparazzzi, Thanks, but I generally don't complete GA/FL/FA reviews because I've got too many other balls in the air to juggle. But good luck! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:36, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two Indeterminate Lines until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:37, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Another Believer, I know you are busy with the BLM Wikiproject, but I was wondering if were willing to start a WikiProject on the Ku Klux Klan whenever you have time to do so. I hope this request doesn't make you uncomfortable after starting the BLM project. Honestly though, when you requested to have a BLM barnstar made, I was quite shocked because the day before I had made the KKK Barnstar. Jerm (talk) 20:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Jerm, Hello! I am not interested in creating this particular WikiProject, but you might ask for assistance/interest at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council, or more specifically, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. I'm working on BLM, Wiki Loves Pride, and WikiProject COVID-19 this month, so I'm a bit focused on other things. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

That's fine, I went ahead and made WP:KKK. Jerm (talk) 20:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi there,

I'll be reviewing this page within the next 7 days. In the meantime, there are some additions you can make to the article. I've left comments here: Talk:Poundcake (album)/GA1. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 21:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I've finished the review. It will be passed pending some changes. I've given you seven days. Please let me know if this will be an issue. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 21:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Lil-unique1, I've replied. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2020. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. All times and dates stated are in UTC. Current events Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 00:01 on 16 June. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought about helping out at the Guild, or you know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. June Blitz: This blitz begins at 00:01 on 14 June and ends at 23:59 on 20 June, with themes of articles tagged for copyedit in May 2020 and requests. Drive and blitz reports March Drive: Self-isolation from coronavirus may have played a hand in making this one of our most successful backlog elimination drives. The copy-editing backlog was reduced from 477 to a record low of 118 articles, a 75% reduction. The last four months of 2019 were cleared, reducing the backlog to three months. Fifty requests were also completed, and the total word count of copy-edited articles was 759,945. Of the 29 editors who signed up, 22 completed at least one copy edit. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April Blitz: This blitz ran from 12 to 18 April with a theme of Indian military history. Of the 18 people who signed up, 14 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed a total of 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. May Drive: This event marked the 10th anniversary of the GOCE's copy-editing drives, and set a goal of diminishing the backlog to just one month of articles, as close to zero articles as possible. We achieved the goal of eliminating all articles that had been tagged prior to the start of the drive, for the first time in our history! Of the 51 editors who signed up, 43 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news Progress report: as of 2 June, GOCE participants had processed 328 requests since 1 January, which puts us on pace to exceed any previous year's number of requests. As of the end of the May drive, the backlog stood at just 156 articles, all tagged in May 2020. Outreach: To mark the 10th anniversary of our first Backlog Elimination Drive, The Signpost contributor and GOCE participant Puddleglum2.0 interviewed project coordinators and copy-editors for the journal's April WikiProject Report. The Drive and the current Election of Coordinators have also been covered in The Signpost's May News and Notes page. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC).

If you don't mind I'd like to keep the Monument Ave. pictures in the gallery. As I see it, they have more impact there. The remaining ones are less impressive by themselves. deisenbe (talk) 19:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Deisenbe, OK. I'd prefer to have images interspersed throughout the text, but I won't revert if you feel strongly. In general, I thought galleries were discouraged. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you point me to any policy deprecating galleries? deisenbe (talk) 21:19, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Deisenbe, WP:Gallery says, "In articles that have several images, they are typically placed individually near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). Wikipedia is not an image repository. A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the below paragraphs or moved to Wikimedia Commons. Generally, a gallery should not be added so long as there is space for images to be effectively presented adjacent to text." ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I believe this is applicable: "A gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images." Putting them together says, "hey, we have a big change, a momentous change, taking place". That is, used together, they make a statement, in my judgment an appropriate starement, that inserting them separately as illustrations of text does not. So I'm going to put them back together, since you kindly say you won't revert me. If you have no problem I think this should be copied to article's Talk page. deisenbe (talk) 22:42, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Deisenbe, Sure, you're welcome to copy or continue this discussion with others on the article's talk page. Happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:50, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate your work on getting the article in better shape. There's still more historical background I haven't found yet but I decided it might be ready to go. I wasn't sure how to divide it into sections but I did some work on separating it into paragraphs, anyway. What I don't know how to do is find the source of the text "the bronze statue features an allegorical angel with outstretched wings dressed in robes with a laurel wreath on her head. In one hand she supports a dying soldier holding a battered rifle, while in her other hand—held high—she holds a second laurel wreath to place on the soldier when he expires". Somewhere in the history of List of Confederate monuments and memorials (from which List of Confederate monuments and memorials in North Carolina was split) those words were added. Three sources are given for the section and one I can't find, but it looks like it might be a source for something else. There's no way the exact words used by whoever added them are based on the two sources I did find. I'm wondering what to do at this point. The description seems important enough to keep but I don't know where it came from.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Vchimpanzee, This at least helps with sourcing "allegorical". This should work for angel, wings, and dying soldier. I also think there's a little freedom to simply describe the memorial by obvious features, or you can just remove whichever text you're unable to source, such as the claim about the laurel wreath. Does this help? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not about to remove any of that description. I think it's important. Anyway, I'll start with what you gave me. Thanks. Searches I do don't seem to get very far.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Vchimpanzee, IMO, the only part that's not appropriate is "to place on the soldier when he expires". The rest is obvious just from looking at the picture. I've removed the one bad/dead source, which may not have been reliable in the first place. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:42, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

That works for me.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Vchimpanzee, Great! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Now if we can just figure out how to deal with the edit conflict.

Apparently you did. The bad source looks like it's about the Baltimore statue anyway and I found sources for that.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

• Library Card Platform
• New partnerships
  • ProQuest
  • Springer Nature
  • BioOne
  • CEEOL
  • IWA Publishing
  • ICE Publishing
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll let you take over. It bothered me seeing the article just sitting there but I figured I gave you plenty of chances to expand it. I just needed to wait a little longer.

What do you think of this picture?

People think the old BB&T building is ugly, though I admit yours is a better photo of the monument itself. I put your photo in the article about the building because the one that was there just wasn't very good.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:58, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Vchimpanzee, I like this image as well. I'm working on other things and don't plan to revisit the Vance Monument entry immediately, if you want to revisit. Sorry if I was stepping on toes, just wanted to add the infobox and image. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

No, you did the right thing. I was all set to find information about previous efforts to remove the monument and other history, but I don't really have time.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

And there's a new development in the Gloria Victis story I have to deal with.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Vchimpanzee, All good. I hope to revisit a lot of these newly created pages later, but for now I'm just trying to keep up with all the removals and create stubs for individual monuments. I know some folks don't like stubs but sometimes one just has to get the ball rolling...! Happy editing, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I created the Gloria Victis page a while back when there was talk of moving it, but I was uncertain it was notable. And I still haven't found some earlier protests. I remember page after page filled with complaints about WEND and a year later it was the same with Gloria Victis. This week I decided to take a chance.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:23, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list

This edition of the Editing newsletter includes information the Wikipedia:Talk pages project, an effort to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. The central project page is on MediaWiki.org.

• Reply tool: This is available as a Beta Feature at the four partner wikis (Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian Wikipedias). The Beta Feature will get new features soon. The new features include writing comments in a new visual editing mode and pinging other users by typing @. You can test the new features on the Beta Cluster. Some other wikis will have a chance to try the Beta Feature in the coming months.
• New requirements for user signatures: Soon, users will not be able to save invalid custom signatures in Special:Preferences. This will reduce signature spoofing, prevent page corruption, and make new talk page tools more reliable. Most editors will not be affected.
• New discussion tool: The Editing team is beginning work on a simpler process for starting new discussions. You can see the initial design on the project page.
• Research on the use of talk pages: The Editing team worked with the Wikimedia research team to study how talk pages help editors improve articles. We learned that new editors who use talk pages make more edits to the main namespace than new editors who don't use talk pages.

– Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Another Believer,

I'm writing to ask if there is a hashtag that I should use, for edits I make as part of the June 2020 Black Lives Matter article improvement drive, described at this page

I lead a small wiki-editing group, and this Friday we are going to focus our edits on this project. Wondering if I should ask group members to include a hashtag in their edits?

Thank you, Wikipersistence (talk) 18:58, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipersistence, Thanks for the note!, but I'm not aware of a hashtag being used, nor am I sure how they are created or tracked in edit summaries. But, you're welcome to add new and improved articles here, or really share a list anywhere and let me or the WikiProject know and we can update the list appropriately. Thanks for your interest and contributions to Wikipedia! Good luck on Friday, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, Another Believer! I'll add our edits to the list, thanks for the suggestion on that. Wikipersistence (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Statue of Sam Davis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. WashuOtaku (talk) 14:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Sigh ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:16, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Heya AB :-) I got 75 more of these. You think the FAQ should go under the talk header for all of them? I was thinking the FAQ is more important than what's in the talk header, and putting it at the top of the page would increase the chances it'd be seen by editors and not just glossed over or scrolled past. I don't really have a strong opinion, I just don't want to do 75 of these and have you move it 75 times; I'm happy to rearrange the order before I continue if you think that's best. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 22:07, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Levivich, I believe I'm putting things in order per Wikipedia:Talk page layout. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:16, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Foiled again by documented global consensus! OK I'll do that, too. Cheers! Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 22:19, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Levivich, Ok, thanks, take care! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:24, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statue of Christopher Columbus (New London, Connecticut) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Sigh... ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Administrator changes Malcolmxl5 John • TheCoffee • Tim! Creffett → GeneralNotability DeltaQuad → AmandaNP

CheckUser changes Bbb23 Interface administrator changes TonyBallioni

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.

Technical news

• Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
• The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
• The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
• Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Seven years ago this week, the Editing team made the visual editor available by default to all logged-in editors using the desktop site at the English Wikipedia. Here's what happened since its introduction:

• The 50 millionth edit using the visual editor on desktop was made this year. More than 10 million edits have been made here at the English Wikipedia.
• More than 2 million new articles have been created in the visual editor. More than 600,000 of these new articles were created during 2019.
• Almost 5 million edits on the mobile site have been made with the visual editor. Most of these edits have been made since the Editing team started improving the mobile visual editor in 2018.
• The proportion of all edits made using the visual editor has been increasing every year.
• Editors have made more than 7 million edits in the 2017 wikitext editor, including starting 600,000 new articles in it. The 2017 wikitext editor is VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode. You can enable it in your preferences.
• On 17 November 2019, the first edit from outer space was made in the mobile visual editor.
• In 2019, 35% of the edits by newcomers, and half of their first edits, were made using the visual editor. This percentage has been increasing every year since the tool became available.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Do you think Honey Davenport has a shot at becoming a featured article? I've never gone through the FAC process before, but my own understanding of the FA criteria doesn't give me reason to believe there are any areas in which the article clearly falls short. I've done my best to keep it updated, and the prose has been expanded by about 25% since the article was promoted to GA. Thought to ask your opinion since you probably have a better sense for this. Thanks, Armadillopteryx^talk 05:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, I say go for it! You're clearly willing to make any improvements needed to address concerns by reviewers. Worst case scenario, the article isn't promoted. :) ---Another Believer _(Talk) 05:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Would you be willing to give it a once-over and let me know if you see anything glaring? Totally understand if you don't have time, though! Armadillopteryx^talk 05:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, I'm not too familiar with FA standards, despite having been through the process 5 times, but I'd maybe expect a bit of trimming to rely less on social media posts, YouTube videos, etc. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, removing a little detail for the sake of a stronger-sourced entry. But, I don't think I'd make changes before nominating. I think the article is in a state where you can nominate and just respond to the concerns that arise. I think you'll find the reviewing editors are picky but they have Wikipedia's best interest in mind. I hope you'll take the plunge! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 05:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Will do; thank you! I also had the thought to comb through the sources and see if any of the lower quality ones can be made redundant—I often added those for new works before secondary coverage came out (and in most cases, it did). Armadillopteryx^talk 06:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, You're in great hands with Nikkimaria, and good luck at FAC! ~---Another Believer _(Talk) --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:16, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Armadillopteryx^talk 15:18, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divas Lip Sync Live until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 21:10, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Sigh ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:36, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Another Believer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mary Jane Holland".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:24, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

UnitedStatesian, *sigh* So frustrating to log in and see the page has already been deleted. I wish editors had more than a few hours to remove the tag. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@Another Believer: sorry about that; note that if the page has an AfD template on it, a bot will give you a one-month advance warning before it becomes G13 eligible. If you want it WP:REFUNDed, let me know if you need any help with that. And/or you could propose at WT:CSD a holding period before deletion, like the seven days that applies to empty categories. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

UnitedStatesian, Thank you. Actually, now that I see the draft page, I am fine with deletion. I created the original redirect (which has since been recreated in main space), but did not work to expand the draft at all. No need to save on my account. Thanks again! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Trump Tulsa rally until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GoingBatty (talk) 17:51, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Sigh, seriously? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:09, 19 July 2020 (UTC)