User talk:Fox/November 2015

WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.

This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Cas Liber (submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.

Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to Rationalobserver (submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.

A full list of our award winners are:

• Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 330 featured pictures in the final round.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 160 did you knows in the final round (310 in all rounds).
• Cas Liber (submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for 26 featured articles in all rounds.
• West Virginian (submissions) wins the prize for fourth place
• Calvin999 (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Rationalobserver (submissions) wins a final 8 prize.
• Harrias (submissions) wins a final 8 prize and the FL prize for 11 featured lists.
• Rodw (submissions) wins the most prizes: a final 8 prize, the GA prize for 41 good articles, and the topic prize for a 13-article good topic and an 8-article featured topic, both in round 3.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for the most news articles in round 3.

We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 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.

Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey, are you still active on Wiki? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 08:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Jaakobou: Yes! — foxj 16:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to have the way I've been pushed off Wikipedia reviewed. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 20:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

@Jaakobou: Not sure if I'm the one to contact about that? — foxj 23:24, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Have you heard any news about some of the stabbing attacks in Israel? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 10:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Foxj, I did notice you wanted concrete samples but I am concerned that pointing fingers would end up with comments about how bad/acceptable a/b/c examples are and distract from the idea of establishing a clear no 'mukawama' policy. I did review a couple user-spaces of editors involved in writing up the current stabbing related articles. I've found one that fits the misuse of user-space bill though it is not entirely "poetry" about victims rising up to victory with weapons. If pressed, I'm willing to privately link to the one I've found as well as the old "poetry" that I got into trouble over. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:57, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Do you figure this can be raised for the ARBCOM committee to explicitly clarify that 'poetic militancy' (on either side of the conflict) is inappropriate for the purpose of the project? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:47, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Julius Green, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Daily Record. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Foxj. Just stopping by to thank you for disambiguating all of those links to The Legend of Zelda (video game)—I appreciate it! Also, in case you missed it, a pretty lengthy requested-move discussion is taking place on the original Zelda game's talk page. —zziccardi (talk) 02:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@Zziccardi: Bah. Voiced my opinion, ta. (You're welcome though.) — foxj 19:27, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Foxj,

Regarding your comment when closing the Emma Tillman AfD, may I ask how best to go about creating guidelines for such biographies, and how to get as many editors involved who are not involved in editing longevity-related articles? Unfortunately it's become a bit of a battleground with too many people trying to push their own personal point of view rather than considering Wikipedia policy, and it's resulted in a mass of articles being chaotically nominated for deletion.

Thanks! -- Ollie231213 (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ollie231213: Honestly I'm not sure. Maybe start one in collaboration with the WikiProject? — foxj 12:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

re . You were among the original admins to chime on the issue. I don't recall if it were in support of keeping or removing polemics, but I'm fairly certain you stated the content was unpleasant. I was hoping to have old participants (who agreed and disagreed with my view) discuss the policy and come to a consensus on what it should mean and how it should be phrased. Anyway, seeing your lack of interest in chiming in on this, I won't ping you again about it. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 00:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

@Jaakobou: That's alright, don't mean to be blunt, just don't think I can add anything to this (frankly I don't remember getting involved to start with). — foxj 00:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)