User talk:DebashisM

Welcome!

Hello, DebashisM, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! – Zntrip 00:48, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,DebashisM, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Shirt58 (talk) 13:10, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

A tag has been placed on Indian Society of International Law requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. reddogsix (talk) 06:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for taking the time to contribute.

I'm a bot designed by another Wikipedia editor, and I'm here to help you with our deletion process. I noticed that while working on an article recently, you removed a speedy deletion template that tagged it for deletion. Don't get discouraged! Deletion discussions happen on Wikipedia all the time.

If you don't want the article to get deleted, please click here.

The link will take you to the talk page, where you can explain why the article should be kept. If you have any questions about this or need help with editing, you can ask at the Help desk.

We really hope you'll stick around to help make Wikipedia better! Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 07:09, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that some editors have a habit of starting a draft article with a copy of copyrighted material, in some cases with the intention of cleaning up and removing the copyright problems. This is not good practice for more than one reason. We do not permit material in violation of copyright, even temporarily. --SPhilbrickT 16:05, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Indian Society of International Law, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. §everal⇒|Times 19:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

§everal⇒|Times 20:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

naveenpf (talk) 04:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Naveen, Thanks for the invite. However, I have already become a member of the Indian Chapter of WikiMedia during the recent WikiConference at Mumbai. My membership no. is INI-138 and valid till March 2012. DebashisM (talk) 04:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. — Jean Calleo ^(talk) 20:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Indian Society of International Law has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. — Jean Calleo ^(talk) 20:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DebashisM.

Will you consider taking a look at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks? The issue of extending the coverage of the page to trade names as well as trademarks may not be as simple or automatic as some assume. An international perspective might be valuable, since these matters tend to be viewed through American glasses. Best wishes, Noetica^Tea? 22:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed your recent change to the Indian Air Force article, particularly in the "helicopters" section. I fail to understand how the contentyou added is relevant to the topic at hand. Even if it is, it is totally unnecessary to go into such details in an article that tries to give an overall general picture of the Indian Air Force. Such details can obtained by the readers (if they are interested) from the operational history section of the article of the helicopter in question, and are not necessary in the main IAF article. I am removing those additions from the article for now. If you still strongly feel that those details are indeed required for complete understanding of the topic, please discuss the matter on my talk page first (the IAF talk page will do fine as well, if that is more convenient for you). Thanks --RGS (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to the above on the talk page of IAF.

DebashisM (talk) 18:21, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Debashis,

The message you that left for me shows how immature you are! (I find that really annoying and arrogant.)

Let me clarify :

1. I did not revert your edits because of any personal grudge against you! So cool it. I don't even know you my friend.

2. There are 3 references given in the 'death section' in that article. I don't know who cited them anyways. And like I had mentioned, the references CLEARLY mentions the date as 4th December. One of those 3 references are : http://www.efi-news.com/2011/12/dev-anand-passes-away.html

And this above reference link, I have not added! And I am not the author of it anyways. Like you said, read the article before you post, you too read this article once.

3. And as a responsible wikipedian, I had commented there, as "If you get more reliable sources claiming it to be 3rd december, then update accordingly!". So I dont see what the fuss is about. If you get a more reliable source, like reuters/bbc etc, that clearly mentions the date, then go ahead and update it.

4. Your HT times article does say 'last night'. But it does not mention which part of the night. After 0000 or before 0000.

Chill out man. Wikipedia is all about sharing information and trying to make the information as correct as possible. I don't do anything on wikipedia just for the heck of it.

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbmishra (talk • contribs) 12:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Mishra,

I came to know of the news by 6.30 am here in India... and if we give atleast an hour for the news percolation, then Dev Saab should have died on Saturday i.e. 3rd December 2011.

You definitely seem to have a problem reading my friend - the reliable HT clearly states

"Veteran actor Dev Anand dies of cardiac arrest in London

Press Trust Of India

London, December 04, 2011

First Published: 07:18 IST(4/12/2011)

Last Updated: 12:43 IST(4/12/2011)" and goes on to say -

Dev Anand, the 'Evergreen Romantic Superstar' of Indian cinema, passed away in London on Saturday night following cardiac arrest. He was 88."

Further "The Mirror" goes on to quote Dev's manager, Mohan Churiwala who said: "His son Sunil came out of the bathroom and saw that Dev saab was not responding. He called the doctor, who said that he had a heart attack. He died at 10 in the night in London." Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2011/12/04/dev-anand-dead-bollywood-legend-to-be-cremated-in-london-115875-23609556/#ixzz1fZKgWvsG

Now are yo satisfied with my proper readings and research?

DebashisM (talk) 12:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Now I am satisfied with your 'proper readings and research'! (With the reference that you have given from 'The Mirror'). But as I have said before, and mentioned in the comments of the page, if you have a better and reliable reference, then simply go ahead and make the changes with appropriate references.

I am stating again, there were 3 references cited in the page, and 2 of them mentioned the date as 4th. And that was the reason why I changed it to 4. I am not obsessed with the number 4 anyways. And if you think those references given as the citations are wrong or not reliable, then delete them and update with this reference from 'The Mirror'.

You have done a good 'reading and research'. But have you mentioned them (The Mirror) in the page ? If yes : thanks, great!. If no : your research values to zero!

Its always better to give the right references and correct it whenever possible. But it doesn't make sense to make personal attacks (personal attacks : I do better reading and research than you, you have a problem .. bla bla) over such issues (unless it was vandalism on my side, which was clearly not the case here). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbmishra (talk • contribs) 14:04, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

naveenpf (talk) 02:47, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite... Am really excited and honoured... I'll look through the topics and let you know whether I'l be in a position to contribute in any of the pages... Presently getting late for Court... I'll surely revert back... (The problem with us is that we are not able to sit in front of the Comp from 9-5 ;) ) Regards. DebashisM (talk) 03:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

wat sud i wrt?

Can you pl. look at the India Quiz page, one answer/query is waiting for you to answer..Thnx..Siva — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.123.163.20 (talk) 17:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the discussion to the correct place and commented. I ask that no change be made until consensus is achieved as the list is poised on the brink of FLC (probably this weekend). --Muhandes (talk) 11:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Thank you for playing the word association games, but per the rules you can only add one word per turn (except in Double Association, where you can add only two), regardless of how many other people have played since your last turn. Accordingly I've removed all but your first-added word to the Radial Ultra game and all but your first added two to the Double Association game. Thryduulf (talk) 12:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The software goofed when I edit conflicted with Hasteur on the Ultra game, so I've switched my word back to his. As you associated with my word (Pacific Islands) rather than Hasteur's (Bora Bora) (completely innocently on your part) you might want to change your word - it does work with Bora Bora as well though so you don't have to. See user talk:Thryduulf#*cough* for a fuller explanation. Thryduulf (talk) 00:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Whatever be, move on... DebashisM (talk) 03:24, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On "Double Association", you play TWO words. Please play a second word to go with your first word on the Abraham Lincoln branch. The word count should always be an even number. Thank you.50.96.25.105 (talk) 04:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I have to split one aspect of the discussion here. In this edit you said "legal actions may be initiated". Could you please elaborate on that? --Muhandes (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to elaborate. Every author, edit and publisher is responsible for his/her/their work. So if their work infringes the rights of others, then they have always have a legal remedy in all jurisdictions. Its not any kind of threat, but an assertion of reality. (It is another story that since most legal jurisdiction are national in character, it is only the work which can be restricted.) DebashisM (talk) 20:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what rights are being violated when someone asks for discussion over the term used for the specialization. Please don't be offended, but I think you are implying way too much into this. The only thing that happened here is you making an edit to an article and another editor (myself) asking for discussion of the matter, discussion which should end up improving the entire list. While you may be concerned with a single entry (which is nothing bad in itself), Lynch and myself are concerned with the entire list. Why you insist on looking at this as if we have some agenda is beyond me. Our only interest in this is to finalize the effort of maybe a dozen editors at WP:INEI (granted I was the one who put most of the effort but I am just one of many) who worked on this for almost a year. --Muhandes (talk) 00:39, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that my rights are being violated. But the concerned university or any other person having a locus, may seek legal remedies for stating what it is not.

From now on, I'd refrain from stating my opinion more than once. Even if I have something material to contribute, I try to disseminate the same. However, I'll waste no time and effort to fight a war (even if justified), because I have no intention of waging a war. DebashisM (talk) 09:08, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Rono Mukherjee requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. WWGB (talk) 08:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Happy to be helped!
	Thanks for pitching in at Offline Wikipedia for Indian Schools! You are going to make a lot of children very happy :) AshLin (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-notable list written in an inappropriate tone.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 09:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-notable list written in an innapropriate tone.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 09:49, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dimri is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dimri until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Cloudz679 20:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On what basis you are placing that template on my page?? --Rawal of Jaisalmer (talk) 14:48, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your post on my talkpage:

Dear User,

I have started to patrol wikipedia after my becoming a Novato... and check articles which are spams or are self promotional.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free advertisement billboard.

We are strict on the issue of notability. See the guidelines here.

See Criteria for speedy deletion here. Your site falls under G11.

I do like your idea of micronation... but my individual liking wouldn't count. If your micronation gets adequate coverage in press and print media, do come back with your article and we'd be happy to host and post it. In other words, Wikipedia should not be your first and/or only resource. The website and wikia on the same is also managed and controlled by little known entities, probably you and/or your friends (or any of the so called 600 members), so the Wikipedia article is self promotional.

In all probability, your article would be deleted by an admin, but after proper reviewing. If you have something to state, then do so on the talk page of the article which will be looked at by him before taking any action. (I am posting a copy of both our talks on the article talk page for his understanding).

~ DebashisM^Talk 15:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited List of female Chief Ministers in India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Punjab (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Muhd Ariff Bin zulkifly requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Cloudz679 20:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	To Wikipedia's 11th Anniversary Celebrations!
	An invitation for you to come and join us for Wikipedia's 11th Anniversary Celebrations in Delhi on the 15th Jan 2012: Click here for more details. Will be great to see you! :) Nitika.t (talk) 13:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

The House of Zúñiga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Charles V, Line, Estella and Zuniga

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DebashisM,

You are one of a number of users who recently received a message from SDPatrolBot. I'm curious to hear about your experience with the speedy deletion process and how you feel about the message you received. Specifically, I'd like to know...

1. Was the message clearly written?
2. Was it helpful in communicating what you should do to save your article from getting deleted?
3. Are there any changes you'd like to see made to such messages in the future that you think might make them more effective for new users?
4. Any other observations you'd like to make about contesting a speedy deletion? How did you find the process overall?

If you'd prefer not to answer in a public space, you can feel free to email me your response (mpinchukwikimedia.org), and I'll be sure to keep it private unless you indicate otherwise. Your observations and suggestions are really valuable for helping improve the new editor experience on Wikipedia, so any feedback you can give would be appreciated immensely! Thank you, Maryana (WMF) (talk) 00:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

• 12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
• 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
• Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
• Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Debashis, we are organising the 6th Delhi meetup on 12th Feb at Hauz Khas. More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Delhi/Delhi6. We will be discussing Wiki loves monuments and India's participation in it too. Hope you can make it! :) Noopur28 (talk) 10:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DebashisM. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Chinese parsnip root, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: enough context for me to understand - maybe needs redirecting though. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 15:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DebashisM,

Back in December, you got either an AfD or PROD notification, which was part of the template testing project's experiments. If you could go here and leave us some feedback about what you think about the new versions of the templates we tested (there are links to the templates), that would be very useful. (You can also email me at mpinchukwikimedia.org if you want.) Thanks! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 22:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

− − Hi DebashisM, thanks for putting some cautions on the article on Acentronura that I wrote. I will add some more references and I'm hoping that someone will explain to me why mot all of those I have quoted work properly - I think it is something to do with the way they are formatted. I have some book references to add to the websites, but I was having sufficient difficulty persuading those already there to work! thanks for putting some cautions on the article on Acentronura that I wrote. I will add some more references and I'm hoping that someone will explain to me why mot all of those I have quoted work properly - I think it is something to do with the way they are formatted. I have some book references to add to the websites, but I was having sufficient difficulty persuading those already there to work! − DrRickZTTwo (talk) 16:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very good at this - sorry DrRickZTTwo (talk) 16:14, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about the missing tildes '~' - I forgot to add them first time I posted here... Thanks for the welcome message DrRickZTTwo (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct User:DebashisM Your turn. Jisha (Talk) 09:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Round 1 is already over! The 64 highest scorers have progressed to round 2. Our highest scorer was Grapple X (submissions), again thanks mostly to a swathe of good articles on The X-Files. In second place was Tigerboy1966 (submissions), thanks an impressive list of did you knows about racehorses. Both scored over 400 points. Following behind with over 300 points were Ruby2010 (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions), Miyagawa (submissions) and Casliber (submissions). February also saw the competition's first featured list: List of colleges and universities in North Dakota, from Ruby2010 (submissions). At the other end of the scale, 11 points was enough to secure a place in this round, and some contestants with 10 points made it into the round on a tiebreaker. This is higher than the 8 points that were needed last year, but lower than the 20 points required the year before. The number of points required to progress to round 3 will be significantly higher.

The remaining contestants have been split into 8 pools of 8, named A through H. Round two will finish in two months time on 28 April, when the two highest scorers in each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers, will progress to round 3. The pools were entirely random, so while some pools may end up being more competitive than others, this is by chance rather than design.

The judges would like to point out two quick rules reminders. First, any content promoted during the interim period (that is, on or after 27 February) is eligible for points in round 2. Second, any content worked on significantly this year is eligible for points if promoted in this round. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which would otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HI, Could you please check if the answers given are correct and if not provide more clues. The question has been around for a more than a week now. Cheers! Jisha (Talk) 09:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 01:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Tag and Assess 2012. You may find these guides useful

• Guide (Part 1) - To learn the minimum about how to evaluate.
• Guide (Part 2) - To learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template.
• Guide (Part 3) - To learn to assess importance semi-automatically using AWB.

Please let the project know for help. Ssriram mt (talk) 00:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I need your assistance in developing and spreading a wikiproject. Can you help me in developing and spreading this page in wikipedia: Wikipedia:Wikipedia for World Heritage

Thank you and Happy editing Yasht101 :) 06:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We are over half way through the second round of this year's WikiCup and things are going well! Grapple X (submissions), of Pool B, is our highest overall scorer thanks to his prolific writings on television and film. In second place is Pool H's Cwmhiraeth (submissions), thanks primarily to work on biological articles, especially in marine biology and herpetology. Third place goes to Pool E's Casliber (submissions), who also writes primarily on biology (including ornithology and botany) and has already submitted two featured articles this round. Of the 63 contestants remaining, 15 (just under a quarter) have over 100 points this round. However, 25 are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly. 32 contestants, the top two from each pool and the 16 next-highest scorers, will advance to round 3.

Congratulations to Matthewedwards (submissions), whose impressive File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg became the competition's first featured picture. Also, congratulations to 12george1 (submissions), who claimed good topic points, our first contestant this year to do so, for his work on Wikipedia:Featured topics/1982 Atlantic hurricane season. This leaves featured topics and featured portals as the only sources of points not yet utilised. However, as recent statistics from Miyagawa (submissions) show, no source has yet been utilised this competition to the same extent it has been previously!

It has been observed that the backlogs at good article candidates are building up again. While the points for good article reviews will be remaining constant, any help that can be offered keeping the backlog down would be appreciated. On a related note, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's April Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 1,300 articles and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions, including a brand new one for the single largest wikified article! All you have to do is put an asterisk next to the largest article you've wikified, and coordinators will check its wordcount after the drive ends. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks! Note: The drive started April 1, and you can sign up anytime!

Hi, can you please provide a clue or check the answer? Thanks--sarvajna (talk) 02:54, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject GLAM Crafts Museum Hi there! A WikiProject has recently started for all Wikipedia community events, content work, and community collaboration on articles related to the National Crafts Museum in New Delhi, India and related topics. Through this project it hopes to highlight its collection and contribute to free sharing of knowledge. Please join the WikiProjec by signing up here. Thanks and Happy editing! :)

---

To-do list for WikiProject GLAM Crafts Museum: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2014-01-25 To upload images of much of the material in the public domain in the museum's collections To train staff and others how they can add material to Wikipedia according to our rules and without violating Conflict of Interest guidelines To write articles on Crafts Museum related topics To illustrate articles with images donated by the Crafts Museum and to properly categorize these images at Wikimedia Commons To create a proper gallery of Crafts museum images at Commons To create all the proper user boxes, project tags, etc. in order to keep track of project statistics.

Dear Debashis! It would be great if you can join us for our first edit-a-thon at the Crafts Museum, New Delhi on April 21st at 2:00 p.m.! For more information, leave a message on my talk page :) Thanks! Noopur28 (talk) 09:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sad to know that :( But, I hope you can join us online! Thanks!Noopur28 (talk) 10:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 of this year's WikiCup is over, and so we are down to our final 32, in what could be called our quarter-finals. The two highest scorers from each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers overall, have entered round 3, while 30 participants have been eliminated. Pool B's Grapple X (submissions) remains our top scorer with over 700 points; he continues to gain high numbers of points for his good articles on The X-Files, but also Millennium and other subjects. He has also gained points for a good topic, a featured list, multiple good article reviews and several did you knows. Pool E's Casliber (submissions) was second, thanks primarily to his biology articles, with Pool H's Muboshgu (submissions) coming in third, with an impressive 46 did you knows, mostly on the subject of baseball. Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both scored over 600 points. Pools E and H proved our most successful, with each seeing 5 members qualify for round 3, while Pools C and D were the least, with each seeing only 3 reach round 3. However, it was Pool G which saw the lowest scoring, with a little under 400 points combined; Pool H, the highest scoring group, saw over triple that score.

65 points was the lowest qualifying score for round 3; significantly higher than the 11 required to enter round 2, and also higher than the 41 required to reach round 3 last year. However, in 2010, 100 points were needed to secure a place in round 3. 16 will progress to round 4. In round 3, 150 points was the 16th highest score, though, statistically, people tend to up their game a little in later rounds. Last year, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 points were needed. Guessing how many points will be required is not easy. We still have not seen any featured portals or topics this year, but, on the subject of less common content types, a small correction needs to be made to the previous newsletter: File:Wacht am Rhein map (Opaque).svg, our first featured picture, was the work of both Matthewedwards (submissions) and Grandiose (submissions), the latter of whom has also gone on to score with File:Map of the Battle of Guam, 1944.svg. Bonus points also continue to roll in; this round, Ealdgyth (submissions) earned triple points for her good articles on William the Conqueror and the Middle Ages, Casliber and Cwmhiraeth both earned triple points for their work on Western Jackdaw, now a good article, Dana Boomer (submissions) earned triple points for her work on lettuce and work by Stone (submissions) to ready antimony for good article status earned him triple points. Jarry1250 (submissions) managed to expand Vitus Bering far enough for a did you know, which was also worth triple points. All of these highly important topics featured on 50 or more Wikipedias at the start of the year.

An article on the WikiCup in the Wikimedia Blog, "Improving Wikipedia with friendly competition", was posted at the end of April. This may be of interest to those who are signed up to this newsletter, as well as serving as another way to draw attention to our project. Also, we would again like to thank Jarry1250 (submissions) and Stone (submissions), for continued help behind the scenes. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gourab Banerji has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. TexasAndroid (talk) 21:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We're halfway through round 3 (or the quarter finals, if you prefer) and things are running smoothly. We're seeing very high scoring; as of the time of writing, the top 16 all have over 90 points. This has already proved to be more competative than this time last year- in 2011, 76 points secured a place, while in 2010, a massive 250 was the lowest qualifying score. People have also upped their game slightly from last round, which is to be expected as we approach the end of the competition. Leading Pool A is Cwmhiraeth (submissions), whose points have mostly come from a large number of did you knows on marine biology. Pool B's leader, Grapple X (submissions), is for the first time not our highest scorer at the time of newsletter publication, but his good articles on The X-Files and Millenium keep him in second place overall. Miyagawa (submissions) leads Pool C, our quietest pool, with content in a variety of areas on a variety of topics. Pool D is led by Casliber (submissions), our current overall leader. Nearly half of Casliber's points come from his triple-scored Western Jackdaw, which is now a featured article.

This round has seen an unusually high number of featured lists, with nearly one in five remaining participants claiming one, and one user, Muboshgu (submissions), claiming two. Miyagawa's featured list, 1936 Summer Olympics medal table, was even awarded double points. By comparison, good article reviews seem to be playing a smaller part, and featured topics portals remain two content-types still unutilised in this competition. Other than that, there isn't much to say! Things are coming along smoothly. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:29, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this great new article! I just saw it when patrolling new pages and it looks perfect. References, categories, you're set :). Drop me a line if you need any help in the future. Ironholds (talk) 00:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the lateness of this letter; our usual bot wasn't working. We are now entering round 4, our semi-finals, and have our final 16. A score of 243 was required to reach this round; significantly more than 2011's 76 points, and only a little behind 2010's 250 points. By comparison, last year, 150 points in round 4 secured a place in the final; in 2010, 430 were needed. Commiserations to Pool A's igordebraga (submissions), who scored 242 points, missing out on a place in the round by a whisker. However, congratulations to Pool B's Grapple X (submissions), whose television articles have brought him another round victory. Pool A's Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second overall, with an impressive list of biological did you knows, good articles and featured articles. Third overall was Pool D's Muboshgu (submissions), with a long list of contibutions, mostly relating to baseball. Of course, with the points resetting every round, the playing field has been levelled. The most successful Pool was Pool D, which saw seven into the final round. Pool B saw four, C saw three and Pool A saw only the two round leaders.

A quick note about other competitions taking place on Wikipedia which may be of interest. There are 13 days remaining in the June-July GAN backlog elimination drive, but it is not too late to take part. August will also see the return of The Core Contest- a one month long competition first run in 2007. While the WikiCup awards points for audited content on any subject, The Core Contest about is raw article improvement, focussing heavily on the most important articles on Wikipedia. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:51, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DebashisM, I really like the way you are contributing to WP India education related articles, you are doing a fantastic job, keep it up. I would plea to you if you could contribute at Kuvempu University article, since this article requires enormous contributions and also try to bring to other WP India editor knowledge so that they too can contribute to the article substantially. Cheers!--♥ Kkm010 ♥ ^{♪ Talk ♪} ߷ _{♀ Contribs ♀} 09:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikifier Your Wikification Newsletter – Volume II, Issue I, July 2012 Front Cover • From the editor • General news Membership • June drive results

Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's August Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks! Note: The drive starts August 1, and you can sign up anytime!

EdwardsBot (talk) 21:23, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! There is an ongoing proposal at the project talkpage concerning the future of wikification, including possible deprecation of the {{wikify}} template which is being discussed at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 10. Your input would be greatly appreciated!

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of the wikify project. To update your status, go here.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC) on behalf of Project Wikify[reply]

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

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

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

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you have an issue with a redirect that doesn't qualify for speedy deletion, please take it to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion rather than blank the page as you did with Professional education. Thanks! -- KTC (talk) 17:29, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 19:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikifier Your Wikification Newsletter – Volume II, Issue I, November 2012 Front Cover • From the editor • General news Membership • Drive results Hello, wikifiers! The November 2012 issue of the project newsletter is out, and the December Wikification Drive starts in a couple of days. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks! Note: The drive starts 00:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC), and you can sign up anytime!

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify, 22:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

• Ed! (submissions) was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
•