This is an archive of past discussions with User:Newyorkadam. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to The Oregon Trail (TV series), did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.
Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Ameristralia for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
More to the point, Ameristralia does not exist - the article is based on a joke Reddit page. That's why I have deleted it. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
Please DO NOT make moves like this. Notability is implicit in all 'people' lists, and all you will succceed in doing is creating work for others when the article is moved back. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:41, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Newyorkadam! I have a dynamic IP so it changes every time I log off; I've move the discussion to your talk page so it won't be overlooked. The list isn't a chronological list of when black players joined each team; rather it is a list of when the first black player joined each team. Since Aaron joined the Braves several years after Jethroe, and Jethroe is already on the list as the Braves' franchise first black player, Aaron's entry on the list is out of place. Please respond here and I'll check back for a few days in case you have a follow up question. Rgrds. --64.85.214.46 (talk) 20:24, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Oh, thanks, I get it. Just wondering, why don't you just make an account and then what IP you're using doesn't matter? Newyorkadam (talk) 17:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Yeah, haha. That's why I originally posted it, I clicked on the Google doodle and it searched 'Yosemite National Park'. The News articles that popped up were talking about how it shut down. Newyorkadam (talk) 23:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
That explains why the vandals (present company excepted, obviously) have been hitting the article and not other park articles. I ended up having to protect the article. I do think there might be something in a couple of days to add to the budget section of National Park Service, given the proposals that have been floated to fund the NPS separately (i.e, pay for the popular government programs) and the perennial coverage that the parks receive when the government shuts down as one of the most visible manifestations of these budget fights. Acroterion(talk)03:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
You'd go to WP:AIV, which deals with vandalism, though in general admins will only act after three or four strikes and appropriate warnings. In this case the IP is registered to Hewlett Packard and is probably shared by many users, so I'd assume that the Yosemite edit is a one-off by someone who was fooling around. In any case, one incident is usually just reverted and ignored. A pattern of all bad edits, or rapid vandalism, would be addressed with a block if warnings fail. Acroterion(talk)22:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Ah, thanks! So I went to the page you sent me to, and I found out how to report someone. I understand everything except for this:
It's a good example of Wikipedia's user-unfriendly interface and cumbersome reporting methods. If you've got an IP who's causing problems you'd copy the IPvandal example below the line, replacing IPaddress with the IP and tagging a short reason. The vandal report would use the username instead, and it also requires a reasoning. I think the distinction is just a technical limitation, as in principle there should be no difference. However, my (and other admins') treatment of IPs is different from registered users, as IPs with a modest history of vandalism and a first offense would get blocked for maybe 31 hours (to prevent them from coming back at the same time the next day and picking up where they left off), and assuming that the IP address will turn over to someone else eventually. Registered users with a pattern of nothing but vandalism tend to be indefinitely blocked as vandalism-only accounts, whereas an IP would very rarely be indef-blocked. Repeat offenders get blocked for longer terms, usually increasing by factors of 2 or 3 for successive blocks, especially when they appear to be the same person. School IPs are routinely blocked for long terms, up to a year, if they are consistent sources of vandalism (you can see IP registration through the WHOIS button, though it's often inconclusive). Acroterion(talk)03:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I just reported someone, do Admins automatically check the page? Just wondering, how did you know so quickly I edited the Yosemite page? I'm currently using Lupin's anti-vandal tool.
AIV reports
Hello. Please note that it is not necessary to report editors to AIV for one recent bad edit, especially if they're IP addresses that have edited once in the last three years. Instead, try to warn them accordingly, and report the ones that continue vandalizing after receiving a full set of warnings. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, m.o.p20:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
There are multiple ways; the 'old-fashioned' way would be copying the relevant warning from here onto the user's talk page. For example, if someone just vandalized a page and it's their first edit, you'd use {{uw-vandalism1}}.
If you'd like to automate the process, you can use tools like Twinkle or Huggle that make parts of the process easier.
One thing to note about IP addresses; while some of them are static and are only used by one editor, an overwhelming majority of them are shared between users (for example, at a library, school, or business). If you encounter an IP address which just vandalized a page and see that it has previous warnings on its talk page, check the date on the warnings; generally, if they're more than a week old, and unless there's an identifiable pattern to the user's edits, it's safe to assume good faith and issue a new set of warnings that treat the editor like a new user. If they ignore those warnings and keep disrupting, you're safe to report them to AIV.
Responding to your request on my talkpage, what m.o.p. said. Most of the time a warning will stop the problem and will remind the vandals that we're watching them. It sometimes comes as a shock to people that it's not really so easy to mess with the 'pedia, and most people really aren't being malicious, at least not seriously. There are relatively few occasions where I'll block someone without any warning at all, they'd have to show themselves to be irredeemable through gross libel or be an obvious repeat offender. I saw the Yosemite edit because it was on my watchlist, as I've done a lot of work on National Park Service articles. Acroterion(talk)19:22, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles Ramsey, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Hello Newyorkadam. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled HabitRPG.
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/HabitRPG}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
Hi there
Could you please check my references for "Conyers Baronets" article - I had wished to put page 19 with the reference to "Bowes'" on it - but I have done it wrong and tha actual Page 23 - not 19- gets shown. This reference is the last one I did before your king fix up.
I do hope this makes sense
Cheers
Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.149.168.121 (talk) 09:08, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. Please see above - it is Reference number 5. I do hope this helps - can you fix up how it should be done please? cheers Milke
Hi there Mike! I changed the reference to page 19 as asked: the problem was that it said
Unrelated: In the future please press 'New section' at the top of my Talk page, as this makes a new section so I can organize what's on my talk page better. Also, in the future please sign your comments. This can be done through putting four tildes (~)'s at the end of your message. Thanks for the question!! :) Newyorkadam (talk) 09:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Thankyou so much
Could you please do one more check to see if it is all OK with the conyers Baronets page. I will try to contact you correctly next time. Thanks again
I'll do a check! Just so you know, there's a live IRC help channel available if you ever have a quick question--you can access it here! Newyorkadam (talk) 09:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Comedian, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Kid, Modern Times and 1900s (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.
Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time.
Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden.
Thanks for joining us, Adam. My name is Jethro! You may want to consider checking out some of these scripts that will help make your life as a host a bit easier. Take care,
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arapahoe High School shooting 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 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. John from Idegon (talk) 23:36, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Newyorkadam, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Tentinator07:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Minor Alteration to the article 'The Rats in the Walls'
Some months ago I was reading up on my H.P. Lovecraft. I checked out a few wiki articles on his works and became drawn to the short story 'The Rats in the Walls'. I enjoyed the tale immensely, partly because of how well it was written but also because of how quaint the language was, in comparison to present English. Granted some of it could no longer be considered politically correct, for example the name of the chief character's favourite cat: Nigger Man. Now obviously this is a fairly poor name for a cat, and in fact it was changed in later releases to 'Black Tom'. However I fail to understand the necessity of the removal of this name from the article in question. Granted near the end the fact that the cat was originally named 'Nigger Man' is mentioned, also the fact that it was later changed to 'Black Tom'. It reminds me of the Agatha Christie story, 'Ten Little Niggers'. The book underwent numerous revisions of its title, quite recently transitioning from 'Ten Little Soldiers' to the somewhat more curious 'And Then There Were None'.
My point is that when I originally visited this article the name of 'Nigger Man' was plain to see, if nothing else being a historical curiosity from a time when people were more ignorant than they are now. Noticing it absent (until near the end of the article) I corrected it, imagining that no-one would mind nor care. Within a short time however Newyorkadam removed my edit, stating that it was not constructive.
I put it to you now: Was it constructive? Possibly not. Was it closer to how the article had been when I last visited the page? Yes. Wikipedia is supposed to be a universally accessible encyclopedia, filled with facts and information about countless subjects. What is the point in retroactively removing the word 'nigger' from material in which it was not intended to cause offence, or, if it was intended to cause offence how much more important is it to retain the original language in order to better understand the ignorance of our forebears?
Ladies and gentlemen, I do not expect this poor argument of mine (if you can even call it that) to hold any sway with you, but in my madness I felt it necessary to make some remark after my edit was removed.
Peace be with you all,
Antonius Varus.
You're right, and I'm sorry for me reverting your edit. In the future, if you decide to change it back, please write "Black Tom (previously called 'Nigger Man')". I use anti-vandalism tools that automatically detect possible vandalism and at first glance, your edit appeared to be vandalism.
Newyorkadam, I did leave a description of my actions in the edit history. I apologize if you feel my edit was not a positive contribution to Wikipedia. However, there was some content on the euphonium page that was poorly placed, and I was simply moving it to a more appropriate position.
Ah, very sorry about that! I use huggle to detect vandalism, and for some reason edit summaries aren't showing up. I'll delete the warning on your talk page. I generally move through possible vandalism very quickly; upon further investigation I wouldn't have made that revert. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, sorry! :) 00:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
I'm also reverting my revert on the article.
Thank you for reverting the change, Newyorkadam. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, and having one of my first significant changes reverted was kind of scary, honestly. Have a good night, I guess. BassHero55 (talk) 00:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
hey, i saw that you edited my edit when i changed something to "vaginas" and you just won me $10, a friend of mine said that i could just change something to anything random and it would go unnoticed but i was like nah, people will see it, you can trust wikipedia with that stuff Mogar livingston (talk) 23:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, my first award! :D And it's about vaginas :o In the future please don't vandalize; consider contributing :D Leave me a message if you need any help! Newyorkadam (talk) 23:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Where are you theses day? I have been looking around for you.I hope all is well.
Further I have created a new article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Kota . Please guide me for the article.
It pretty much means that I checked the page and said it was o.k., and that it isn't abusive in some way (e.g. being hateful or threatening people). It didn't change the page in any way. Newyorkadam (talk) 05:05, 30 December 2013 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Barnstar Thanks! Reply
Thank you for the barnstar. I am happy to say that your barnstar was the first one I received in the several years editing and article creation on Wikipedia. It is much appreciated. ruben jc ZEORYMER (talk) 00:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The error was mine. Appreciate the comments on my userpage, although I can not take the credit for the coding: the sectional design was based on an older Wikipedia user. ruben jc ZEORYMER (talk) 21:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bacon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Red pepper (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.
I never meant for it to be submitted into the, "articles for creation". When researching on wiki, I realized I could move my own articles directly into the main space, and that is what I was trying to do. Clearly, I am a total newb at this. Sorry.
Rachel Polant 03:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Rachel Polant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachel Polant (talk • contribs)
It's ok :) You don't even have to use articles for creation, but it's good to help you learn about Wikipedia and its policies. If you really feel it's ready you can technically move it out of Articles for Creation without breaking any rules. Also, at the end of your posts on talk pages, please add four tildes (~) like so: "~~~~". This will automatically sign your comments :D Newyorkadam (talk) 03:48, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! I actually really like Wikipedia, but it feels a bit like Oz. Maybe that's why I enjoy it. How do I move it? Thanks again ;)
It's a fairly confusing process, so I'll do it, but I have to do some work for school now. If it's ok with you, I'll do it tomorrow. If it's urgent I can do it now though. Newyorkadam (talk) 04:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Tomorrow is fine. I appreciate your help. Thanks again :) I think I know how, but I'll get in trouble again ;) I think you hit move, then choose article, change name to, "Sandy Kronenberg" enter reason, and then save. I could be wrong. Rachel Polant 04:40, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
You're absolutely right, but I messed something up somewhere when I moved your article to the Articles for Creation page. I'll need to sort it out tomorrow :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 04:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Sorry for butting in, but I spotted what has happened and I'll do the move once the admins have cleared the additional pages created by Newyorkadam out of the way. Rankersbo (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
between 1930 and 1940, which can be seen by comparing maps from the two dates.<ref name="1930 map">{{cite web | url=ftp://ftp.dot.state.pa.us/public/pdf/BPR_pdf_files/Maps/Statewide/Historic_OTMs/
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pennsylvania Route 456 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac(talk)19:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
No, your reversion to the previous versions does not at all appear constructive, because it returns several statements that are simply false, as well as destroying much time consuming work. Since there was an intervening correction (a period), I cannot simply revert your errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.103.123 (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
I reverted this edit, which does not appear to be constructive. I'm not sure why you made that edit, but whatever. The tool I'm using to revert edits automatically reverted all of your other edits, and I'm sorry about that. Either way, I've fixed the problems and you're all good to go. Sorry for the confusion! -Newyorkadam (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
I actually reverted that edit myself (so I guess we both reverted). I was unsuccessfully trying to fix a layout problem where the "Culture" title was overlapping with a photo. I now assume that apparently partly depends on the browser.
When you sent me your first message with the link to your edits, it showed ALL my corrections erased, and said I could not revert. I was a bit upset. Thanks for fixing that.
Thanks for the offer of aid. I've actually joined a few times over the years, but I use so many computers & connections, it's nice to forget about passwords for once. I'm an old Internet hand, having been on the third connection of ARPANET at UC Santa Barbara long before WWW and wikis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.103.123 (talk) 17:04, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Ah, that's very cool! Once again, if you ever need anything, don't hesitate to ask me or anyone else! I'm also online a lot on the IRC channel #wikipedia-en-helpconnect if you ever want live help :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
I've reverted the page to what I consider the correct revision. Could you please contact me if you have doubts or problems with this version, or edit only the errors you find, rather than erasing all my edits? I will likely continue working on the page, trying to transform it into a real encyclopedia entry, rather than the rather random haphazard collection of additions it has become, perhaps using the French wiki page and other sources as a guide, even though I am pretty much an expert on the subject. Thanks, David 82.224.103.123 (talk) 15:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I never meant to cause any harm to the article, I can assure you that. Misteaks happen. If you need any help on the article don't be afraid to ask :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 15:25, 21 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hello, Newyorkadam. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 17:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
In case you didn't see the note I left on Ed's talkpage, we can run the contest special report this week. Just make sure it's ready by Wednesday. –Mabeenot (talk) 22:04, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello Newyorkadam. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Charles Ramsey".
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Charles Ramsey}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Hello, Newyorkadam. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Tyop Contest. Message added 19:55, 28 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bacon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac(talk)03:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Newyork. We might need more judges for the tyop contest because with users using AWB and the like we might have up to a 1,000 edits to judge a day so we might need more than 2 high schools students to judge this. so maybe we should do more scouting for experienced users willing to judge.--Jeffrd10 (talk) 14:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I was testing judging an entry under John of Reading's section. It was supposed to be number 121, and I tried to put the aye tag, but I am not sure I did it correctly since the numbered theme seemed broken. Can you take a peak at it? Let me know. If I can learn to judge them completely correctly, I will be glad to do a bunch more. Please let me know! I hope you have a great New York type of day or state of mind... Isn't that a SONG? ...but I digress......
So these edits are "not neutral":
Michael Alex Crabtree (born September 14, 1987) is a American football phenomenal wide receiver for the San Francisco 49ers of the National Football League (NFL).
The 49ers were unable to defeat the Seahawks and the self-proclaimed "best cornerback" in the game.
but this is:
Michael Alex Crabtree (born September 14, 1987) is an American football sorry wide receiver for the San Francisco 49ers of the National Football League (NFL). On the NFC Championhip, he was owned by Richard Sherman, the best cornerback in the game.
I admit I would get if you deleted the "phenomenal", but the rest is a million times more neutral than the bullshit that is currently up.
Both edits are not ok to be on Wikipedia. All of the Wikipedia editors edit it on their own time, so please don't be rude. If you need help with editing, feel free to ask :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Tyop contest
Might be that you're planning to do so later, but because of your edit summary of "judging done for all listed", I figured I'd point out that while you've checked the edits, you haven't yet updated the scores. ;) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
@AddWittyNameHere: Yeah, I kinda stopped updating the scores for now. You can get a basic gist of how many points everyone has by looking at the number of diffs they have. I'll just update the current scores at the end of the contest, maybe halfway through. And by the way, I saw your request for AWB, presumably for the contest. I'm asking around on IRC (which I think you should join :) for someone to give you access. -Newyorkadam (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
For general help in fixing typos, but yes, it would be useful for the contest as well, just not the sole reason for requesting it. I'll think about joining IRC. If you want, I can run through the list of entries every other day and update the scores. So long as I don't have to do the updating of the lists and checking the edits, just counting points assuming 1 if no other info given, otherwise as listed behind them, would not be all that much work. Current score would be Newyorkadam - 0; Jamesmcmahon0 - 189 (for the first 120 listed edits, the rest do not seem to have been checked yet); Chris857 - 18; TheOriginalSoni - 0; Casliber - (still) 28; Ramakoudsoud2000 - 0; The Triple M - 0; AddWittyNameHere - 50; Roberticus - you have it listed as 32, but assuming that both edits marked with a questionmark are invalid, the score would actually be 30; John of Reading - 207 (for the first 121 listed edits; rest not yet checked); GoingBatty - 83 (only first 65 edits are checked, so score is only for those). Note: GoingBatty's 16th edit does not have any bonus points listed afterwards, despite having multiple corrections in it. Have not taken this into account in the score, nor have I checked other edits to see if any points were missed. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
@AddWittyNameHere: If you want, feel free to update the current score. I counted 49 for you-- did you see the X'd off one? Just a note to clarify, if it says +2, that mean the one point from the check, then add one. So if I have 'Y +2', I have two points, not three. I'll check on Batty's 16th edit, thanks for telling me. -Newyorkadam (talk) 22:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Yes, that's how I counted. Well, it's what it boils down to, anyway. Mathematically it's more along the lines of (number of edits checked one way or another) - (number of edits not accepted) + (bonus points as listed -1 each (because that first point already falls under the first category)) = points. And yes, I saw that. What happened is that I accidentally counted one of the bonus-points twice. Will update tomorrow, after I get a chance to re-check while not suffering from a severe headache. Less chance of stupid mistakes that way. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:29, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Will do so. Feeling a bit better than yesterday, not perfect but good enough. Currently fighting a couple of vandals, will update the scores sometime in the next few hours, though. Before midnight UTC, anyway. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Indeed. I was keeping an eye on the /v/ thread to keep an eye on their next target, tracking them down through their contributions to their next targets, keeping Mark Arsten informed of their next targets so he could protect the pages, searching the correct versions of pages in a few cases, helping with reverting here-and-there and when the raid was over, tracking down the throw-away accounts and IP-addresses used in the raid for documentation and so that he could hit them with a block. About 50 IP-addresses and a good dozen of articles. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Was alerted to it by Mark Arsten. Can't link you, as 4chan is blacklisted. You'd have to check Mark Arsten's talkpage (here for the link). If you scroll down far enough, you'll even see a screenshot of my conversation with Mark Arsten. There was a short follow-up thread as well, though that one seems to have been deleted. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Not today, it's nearly 3am here, but yeah, I'll hop in sometime soon, see if I like it, perhaps hang around, perhaps not. Updating the scores will be tomorrow, thinking straight is a good idea when doing that. Being too exhausted to keep my eyes open and focused on the text I'm editing is not.AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
Please evaluate the scoreboard as I've applied the first computation of the entries page. I'll run the script that generates the updates 1x a day. Hasteur (talk) 20:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Carriearchdale. Newyorkadam, thanks for creating Bolingbroke Mansion!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This article looks like it is going to be a really great one. I reviewed the article and have tagged it with a few suggestions. YCarriearchdale (talk) 00:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Condiment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romans (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.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bacon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
recipes | publisher=BBC | accessdate=8 February 2014 | author=Carter, Louisa}}</ref> See [[Gammon (meat]].
06/sir-francis-bacon-peanut-brittle-crimes-against-bacon/ |title=Sir Francis Bacon Peanut Brittle [crimes against bacon] – Eat Me Daily |publisher=Eatmedaily.com |date=2009-06-04 |accessdate=
I just wanted to tell (as it seems to be you who are the developer of Vada) that the summary gots a little wierd when reverting an IP-adress.
How it looks after a Vada-edit:
Reverted edits by [[User:82.43.7.207]] ([[User talk:82.43.7.207|talk]]) as in this edit.
How it should look like:
Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/82.43.7.207|82.43.7.207]] ([[User talk:82.43.7.207|talk]]) as in this edit.
Hi there @Josve05a:A930913 is the developer, and I'm helping them test. Those reverts were the first tests since we moved the code from test.wiki to en.wiki and we're working to improve the functionality of Vada. Thanks for telling us though :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hi. I've been editing since 2005 but with long gaps of inactivity and only a couple of articles I personally created or wrote the bulk of, but I have wanted to do more...for years I've been planning to write an article on the History of pharmacy in the United States, which doesn't yet exist, and this week I have begun building it in earnest in my userspace: History of pharmacy in the United States. When I popped into the #wikipedia-en IRC to poke around for possible collaborators, User:Howicus mentioned you as someone who might be interested. So I thought I'd ask....
Keep wiki'ing on, NickDupree (talk) 02:51, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
It's an important topic, and the academic sources on pharmacy's development, and what it reveals about American history and the history of medicine, are extensive and rich. But I have barely incorporated two sources and I already might be getting too long-winded... see if there are obvious/glaring concise phrasings that I've overlooked, and maybe you have great sources you'd like to add? Every little bit helps. —NickDupree (talk) 03:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, could you send me that NY college of pharmacy article again? its previous link doesn't work. That particular piece is especially useful for my article, as it is the earliest example I've seen so far of licensed pharmacists talking smack about the unlicensed (U.S.-wise). NickDupree (talk) 21:53, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
@NickDupree: I don't remember which article it was, and I did a search on the website (BigChalk/ProQuest historical newspapers) for 'new york college of pharmacy' and there's hundreds of articles. On IRC your username is NickDupree right? I'll talk to you on there. -Newyorkadam (talk) 22:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Random header 'cause I'm lazy
Which I responded to to point out how out-of-date my page is. Wait, I promised I wouldn't interrupt your conversation anymore, eh? Oh well, another header solves that issue. XD Also, you're welcome. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Drawception's notability?
Someone requested in the video games request for an article of [drawception.com Drawception]. Would you consider this game notable? Thanks, Bananasoldier (talk) 00:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Ooh! It's a talkpage stalker paying this talkpage a visit! Actually, both your post and the signpost message stuck to the March GOCE copyedit drive message. Solved by pressing enter once at the right place. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
@Bananasoldier: I'd say so-- go ahead and see what happens :)
No problem, Newyorkadam. =) You've probably noticed, but there was a question regarding the bonus prize of the Tyop contest on said contest's talkpage. Now I'll stop interrupting your conversation with Bananasoldier (nice username, by the way), and focus on more productive matters, like figuring out whether or not I'm sober and awake enough to edit Wikipedia articles without leaving huge run-on sentences and a mass of typo's behind. XD AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:25, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kendallina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Convex (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.
I meant to do this, because the disambig page has a definition on it that I wanted and there isn't an article on the word. -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
I've corrected all your grammar and prose related queries to the article, and soon get round to some of the controversies on its violence (of which I was completely unaware!). It was a joy to be marked by you, such a pleasant and happy man. Have a nice day The Almightey Drill (talk) 10:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Quick fixes, nice :D You missed one: "In Nguyen's quote from Twitter, he didn't italicize 'Flappy Bird', he put apostrophes around it. We don't want to misquote ;)" -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
In my opinion, due to the infinity of hoaxes possible in the Twitter age, only those which duped mainstream media into believing it - such as the recent apparent criminalization of Islam in Angola - meet Wikipedia notability. The Almightey Drill (talk) 19:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I was going through the list of adpters and saw your profile. I'm looking for someone I can turn to with questions regarding WP policis, MOS, layout and copyedit issues, etc. — and maybe just to chat sometime. Would you mind taking a look at my request on my userpage? Finnusertop (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring the wiki/Muthanna_Province page's content
It turns out someone from the same IP as mine replaced it's content with a racist statement: "محافظة شيعية نجسة" which means "A Shi'ite filthy province". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.238.72.209 (talk) 08:29, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if you would be able to locate a JSTOR article for me please? Details: The "Innocent and Touching Custom" of Maidens' Garlands: A Field Report (Rosie Morris) Folklore Vol. 114, No. 3 (Dec., 2003), pp. 355-387. Published by: Folklore Enterprises, Ltd. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30035124 I would be mighty grateful if you were able to email me a copy. Thanks. Blackberry Sorbet (talk • contribs) 15:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pilot (Lost) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pakaran -- Pakaran(talk)21:50, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Joe Purdy
Hey. I am a huge JP an and I appreciate your efforts but that douche site has a lot of spammy citations on wikipedia.
Here is an article from ASCAP. ASCAP licenses songs for use in other media. Definitely a reliable source and might have some more information for you to site elsewhere:
Promised to give you an update on the typos for the bonus prize of the tyop contest.
I've been busy gathering the info (and verifying the info in edit summary is correction for those edits) I need for my list of edits-per-typo for the Tyop Contest off-wiki so I can upload them in one go to my userpage. Unfortunately, it's going a little bit slower than expected and I will need a few more hours before I'll be done. Should at the very latest be done at March 1st, 11:59PM UTC (=approx. 24h from now), hopefully sooner. In the mean time, this is the info I have so far: Hubner -> Hübner is the most-corrected typo by me. Assuming AWB correctly counted the number of corrections each edit, the total amount of corrections for Hubner -> Hübner should be 7426. As it seems highly unlikely that AWB will be off by more than 5% in either direction, I'd say it's safe to say that the total must be somewhere in the range of 7050 to 7800. Will have the exact amount for you soon, however. (But manually checking edits with 100-320 corrections to see if the count isn't one or two off is... not much fun and not something I can do with focus for more than an hour-and-a-half straight) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:11, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
No rush! I just didn't want the contest to have to wait for you to finish your stats, but that clearly isn't happening :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 01:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Nah, and it helps me here that it'll be a while still before the judging will be done, eh? In any case, good luck working away that backlog. If just checking my own edits is a shitload of work, I don't even want to imagine how busy you two must be. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 14:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
'cept I have been XD (Well, sort of, anyway. Does asking at the teahouse if someone could dump a welcome template on my talkpage 'cause I needed some of those links count?), in July '13. It was cluttering up my talkpage, however, so has since then been removed. Same for the shitload of talkback-templates, Signposts (though for some reason, I decided to keep those, just off-page), etc. The gesture is appreciated, however. :)AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pilot (Lost), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Shepard (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.
Here's some healthy salad for all your hard work on the Bacon page!
Meatsgains has given you a salad! Salads promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the goodness of salads by tossing one for someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!
Spread the goodness of salad by adding {{subst:Givesalad}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thanks Meatsgains :D I'm going for FA! -15:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Typos
Please update Template:Userbox tyop contest. The Wikipedia:Tyop Contest should for the general contest, whereas the specific contests held over the years should be assigned separate pages. For Example, Asia Cup is general, whereas 2014 Asia Cup is specific. Secondly Wikipedia:Tyop Contest also needs updates. It still says that: The 1st annual Tyop Contest is planned to be run from February 1st to March 1st., is it still running? Please also give a time frame for the announcement of results. Regards. 182.187.43.52 (talk) 14:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
No, it's not, thanks for pointing this out. I've been swamped with work and am still in the process of judging the entries along with the other judge. The contest will hopefully be running again next February to March :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 14:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Your userpage is on my watchlist, and when I saw "Newyorkbrad" as a section header it caught my eye.
Now if you ask me the obvious next question, which is how your userpage got on my watchlist to begin with, the answer to that one is "I don't remember"; I have something like 7500 pages on there by now. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:07, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
I have a suggestion. Would you like to hear? I have tried many forms of vandalism on this site. While many get detected by the automatic filter, the nowiking does not. So, why don't you add blocking large parts of page under nowiki tag in the edit filter? 117.197.85.166 (talk) 19:21, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi! Please stop with the unconstructive edits, you're hindering progress on us helping the world :) And how about you just not be a dick and stop vandalising the encyclopedia, consider becoming a Good Faith editor? Few know that I started out with unconstructive edits, and look at how I've turned around! -Newyorkadam (talk) 19:24, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Talkback
Hello, Newyorkadam. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bot requests. Message added 23:49, 9 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
As you've indicated an interest in working on the WikiProject Baseball newsletter, is there a specific task you'd like to work on for the first issue? If you could indicate the area you're planning to work on at the newsletter desk, that would be great! isaacl (talk) 05:39, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello Adam. Are you a New York City Adam? In a couple of months there will be a WikiConference] in Lower Manhattan. If you are available then you should join us.
@Bluerasberry: I knew your name sounded familiar, nice name! I actually live in Philly, but I can likely make it to New York. I'll see what I can do, thanks for the invite :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 19:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Flappy Bird, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Samwalton9 (talk) 14:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tabula Rasa (Lost) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hahc21 -- Hahc21(talk)18:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Lost
Sure, I haven't seen Lost or edited its articles in a long time, contributing to a long hiatus in editing its articles, but I sure have an interest in building more GAs out of the episodes. Restoring this could be a priority, but I don't know if building Featured Lists (or even GAs, it's been common to recent TV season articles) would be too hard for you. igordebraga≠02:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
@Igordebraga: Ok, if you wanna help, I'm currently going through and re-watching Lost while editing and fixing up the article that I'm currently watching. But if there's any specific article that you wanna work on, I'm up for it :) I might do that topic in the future, but not right now. -Newyorkadam (talk) 02:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hello,
I appreciate your effort and dedication to fairness, however, I do find error with your opinion on my posts. The page was VASTLY outdated (2011) and was greatly slanted in the opposite direction. Nothing that I posted was factually inaccurate and I would implore you to research it if you do not believe me. If anything, I was making the page more neutral because anything that I removed, edited, or added was to fix an outdated and previously biased page.
The previous iteration of said page was far more biased then how I left it. A prime example being the fact that everything I posted was constructive (the previous page had a lot of deconstructive opinion and outdated at that).
Hi there! The reason I reverted your edit is because you included statements such as 'the state's best organized college athletic program'. According to who? What if I think they're the worst team in the world? If you were to say, "According to ESPN, they are the state's best organized college athletic program" (assuming ESPN said this), that would be ok. I suggest you take a look at this Wikipedia discussion on bias. Another thing I suggest you take a look at is referencing. Statements such as 'UofL is consistently the most profitable college sports franchise in the nation and the program has been deemed to have the most equitable fanbase of any school in the country, according to studies' need references. What studies said this? You'll need to reference them, so I highly advise viewing this discussion on why referencing is important and how to do it. If you have any more questions, feel free to write back here :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 06:04, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hello there,
Once again I appreciate your helpfulness in this matter. However, I feel that the biggest issue here, if anything, is adding sources (which I need to do some research on due to the fact that I don't have the technical side down). But as far as accuracy of information, I still feel that it is very much factual. The portion where I said it was the best organized college sports program in the state was backed up by the entirely factual pieces that I added about The university having the most profitable sports franchise in the nation (which is supported by numbers an figures researched by the NCAA themselves) and the fact that nobody can argue that the university is doing better performance wise at the moment than any other team in the state (being the only school in the state to be in a BCS bowl, college world series, and consistently be in the final four in the last half decade). Perhaps I could have worded it slightly different, but I feel like everything I posted is well supported. Thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebasketballman (talk • contribs) 13:43, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Also, it was a very recent article that stated that UofL has the most equitable fanbase in the country. It was pretty prominent and received without question since I think it was ESPN that researched it. Once again, biggest issue is sourcing that I need to figure out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebasketballman (talk • contribs) 14:01, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Two things: First of all, you need to reference the the figures by the NCAA, or else the reader doesn't even know they exist. Second of all, the reason you can't say 'best organized' is because everyone has a different idea of what is the 'BEST' organized. You'd need to say, "The Cardinals are considered the best organized team by the NCAA and ESPN.(put references here)" I hope this helps! -Newyorkadam (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Well, since we have determined that the issue here is not bias or lack of accurate facts and simply a lack of referencing could you please assist me in getting to my edit so that I can add necessary sources and fix it up all neat and proper? I do not know how to get to it since you took it down. Thanks.
Here. Everything you've deleted is on the left; everything you've added is on the right. I know that referencing can be very confusing, so please don't hesitate to ask for help -Newyorkadam (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Okay! Thanks a ton man. I am about to post a revised edit. I hope with the sources it is more up to standards. I think that I have posting with sources mostly figured out. Thanks!
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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.
@Crazyseiko: Hi, the only edit I made on that page was fixing a typo. I don't have a lot of experience with BBC One, and I don't feel comfortable making a decision on this. Thanks for asking me anyway :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 14:59, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hi thanks for your reply, Is it possible you could even come over to the page to help talk about the overall content, IE not what is postage but to see if the issues highlight are actually valid, if you know what I mean? I'm having real trouble with a user who clearly does not have a clue and is bring in his own personnel views onto a page " I think, I cant etc. I'll had to explain upmteen things just to get some better details but any help and points of view would be extremely grateful. --Crazyseiko (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Greetings, I need a good mentor for advice concerning uploading of photos, linking to secondary sources in print that are not readily available on the Internet at present (and in doing so, avoiding copyright policy issues) and COI (I already got whacked for this because I changed my residence and removed a dead link on the stub page about me Frank Niro. See also talk:Frank Niro. I promise not to take up very much of your time. Appreciatively, Frank Niro (talk) 20:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Frank, I'd be happy to help you with any questions you might have Which would you like help with first: uploading a photo, linking to print secondary sources, or avoiding copyright issues? Thanks, Newyorkadam (talk) 20:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Wow, thanks for the quick response! Please add me to your list of current adoptees. We can start with photos (there's no urgency on any of this) I requested a current photo from Susan Polgar to replace the old one on her page and she sent it to me. It is in jpg format, but I'm not sure how to get it onto Wikipedia. If you could point me to the appropriate instructions, I would appreciate it. To see what I am up to in a global sense, please see User:Frank Niro under CJA project notes and status. Thanks again,Frank Niro (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I uploaded my first photo to Paul Truong. I have Susan Polgar and Lev Alburt (and others too) to do now, but I need to gain an understanding of rules for using photos that aren't my own for which I have the subject's permission. I appreciate your help very much. Heading to NY now. I'll try again in a few days. Frank Niro (talk) 05:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi there- this is just a quick note to apologise for a small but important mistake in the last WikiCup newsletter; it is not 64 users who will progress to the next round, but 32. J Milburn (talk) 18:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
I am sending you this message because you listed yourself on meta:Huggle/Members as a beta tester. We desperately need attention of testers, because since we resolved all release blockers, we are ready to release first official version of huggle 3! Before that happens, it would be nice if you could test it so that we can make sure there are no issues with it. You can download it packaged for your operating system (see Wikipedia:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta) or you can of course build it yourself, see https://github.com/huggle/huggle3-qt-lx for that. Don't forget to use always latest version, there is no auto-update message for beta versions!
Should you find any issue, please report it to wikimedia bugzilla, that is a central place for huggle bugs, where we look at them. That is i
mportant, if you find a bug and won't report it, we can't fix it. Thank you for your work on this, if you have any questions, please send me a message on my talk page, I won't be looking for responses here. Thanks, Petrb (talk) 15:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I seek your adoption because I am very confused about all of Wikipedia. I love language and therefore copy-editing, which I have done for five years, and Wikipedia seems like my Internet forever-home. :)
@Duxwing: Sure, I'd love to adopt you I too love copyediting.
Would you rather:
a. Go through a formal question-and-answer layout guide where you do different activities and I validate that you did them correctly
or
b. Just ask me questions whenever you have them?
Also, I'm very active on different IRC channels including #wikipedia-en-helpconnect, where you can ask experienced Wikipedia users for help :) Even if I'm not online, you can ask someone else :D
hugs, whining and gurgling* I'm adopted! The two approaches seem non-mutually-exclusive: want to do them both? What is your IRC handle? Duxwing (talk) 02:02, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Newyorkadam, I saw that you were active on the Bacon talk page. I suggested a merger of Bacon with Back Bacon but don't have the rights to add the tags. Do you think you could do it? Thanks Vile-eight (talk) 22:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
April blitz wrap-up and May copyediting drive invitation
Participation: Out of 17 people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
2005-2011 still need done. I am bored with the article, but if you can crank out a few of those seasons, I can get to work on the profile, and we can have it at GAN by June 1. GoPhightins!23:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello! I think that the "Tyop Contest" should be moved to "Typo Contest" because for example the name of the team is "Typo Team" and not "Tyop Team"! Can this be moved or should it be requested at requested moves? Also I see that there has been very little progress in the update of the scorecard of the contest. Why Jeffrd10 is not helping you in the judgement? Rather he is concentrating on Anti-Vandalism work. I don't think that if we continue with the same pace, the process will be completed before February next year. Faizan13:34, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
@Faizan: It's called the Tyop Contest because it's ironic. I've seen a mostly positive reaction to the current name. Also, I'm very sorry about the slow judging, I've been busy these past few weeks. I'm going to go on a judging surge and will definitely try to contact Jeffrd10 to help me out.
Just an observation that your signature always embeds your name 2 times, one in the beginning and the other at the last! Is it deliberate? Also may be your talk page needs archiving? Jeffrd10 ought to be active at judging himself. Well hope for the best, but I am sure that the judging will not be a one man's game. Faizan16:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
@Faizan: I have two 'Newyorkadam's because I do "~~~~Newyorkadam". I used to do this as a newbie and it's a sort of tradition I've kept :) And I'm planning on archiving soon, thanks :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
NTWW
Hey, um... would you be interested in starting up Not the Wikipedia Weekly again? That was rather fun, and it does serve a useful purpose. Probably would need to roll it into the Signpost, but... Adam Cuerden(talk)18:17, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
You remmeber, that Wikipedia podcast Durova used to run? It could be fun to get five or six editors together for a monthly recording. Might deal with creation of different types of content int he first few episodes. Adam Cuerden(talk)17:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
I know this might be a silly question, and it would be an f***ing load of work as well. But I would very much appreciate any sources of a more or less "overview" nature, particularly like articles in reference sources, relating to the subject of Soka Gakkai. The existing, rather minimal, content on the subject has been rather contentious for some time, and it would be extremely useful if we could get a clearer idea of what existing reference and overview academic sources say about the topic to get a better idea of what to put where. John Carter (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
@Sphilbrick: I think #3 is the best, it gives the best view of his face and he's smiling. I added my photo because it was the only one I knew of that existed at the time. -Newyorkadam (talk) 13:29, 6 June 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Thanks. I replaced the photo; I slightly modified the caption, because I don't recall which session this was, he spoke more than once.--S Philbrick(Talk)13:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Threes! logo.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. czar ♔16:44, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Threes! logo.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Threes! logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's Godot13 (submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, Casliber (submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.
The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk·contribs) The ed17 (talk·contribs) and Miyagawa (talk·contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Newyorkadam, we are to release a new major version of huggle, but we did receive almost no feedback from our beta testing team, which you are a part of (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members). It would be of a great help if you could download it (if you have windows, all you need to do is getting http://tools.wmflabs.org/huggle/files/huggle3.1.0beta.exe and putting it to a folder where you have installed huggle) and test it. You can always get a help with making it @ #huggleconnect!
Major changes:
Multisite support - you can now log in to unlimited number of wikis in 1 huggle session and get a huge queue of all edits made to these wikis. This is good for smaller projects which gets overlooked often.
Ranged diffs - you can select multiple revisions and get a huge diff that display all changes done to them.
The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:
Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
Casliber (submissions) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
Czar (submissions) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
12george1 (submissions) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
Bloom6132 (submissions), the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.
There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.
There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk·contribs) The ed17 (talk·contribs) and Miyagawa (talk·contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello—I was wondering if you were planning on resuming your contributions to The Inside Corner, be it in writing up blurbs for featured images, or in any other capacity? Thanks. isaacl (talk) 04:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I unfortunately haven't been very active on Wikipedia recently. I'd be interesting if helping with The Inside Corner, however. Anything specific you'd like for me to do? Thanks, -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:59, 16 October 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
As I mentioned, you could continue with writing up blurbs for featured images. Or you could try your hand at writing blurbs for featured articles. Feel free to bank multiple entries in the holding queue, which helps avoid a crunch time just before a planned newsletter release date. If you haven't already, please put Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball/Outreach/Newsletter desk on your watchlist, and take a look at its talk page, where you'll see some suggestions for material that could be included in the newsletter. Any of the sections in the newsletter could use help, be it some interesting news tidbits, or updating the list of featured content from this month. If you have any ideas that you'd like to kick around, feel free to discuss them. Of course, if you'd rather spend your Wikipedia editing time working on actual article content, I fully understand and encourage this. Happy editing! isaacl (talk) 01:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. Casliber (submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.
A full list of our prize-winners follows:
Godot13 (submissions) wins the prize for first place and the FP prize for 181 featured pictures in the final round.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the prize for second place and the DYK prize for 65 did you knows in the final round.
Casliber (submissions) wins the prize for third place and the FA prize for four featured articles in the final round.
ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.
Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. 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 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk·contribs) The ed17 (talk·contribs) and Miyagawa (talk·contribs) 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello Newyorkadam. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
WikiProject Baseball newsletter: post winter meetings edition
Greetings—just checking in to see if you'd like to contribute something to WikiProject Baseball's newsletter. Your work on selecting featured pictures was helpful in the past and if you'd like to do it again, that would be great. Blurbs on articles to showcase would also be good and useful to bank in advance, to make it easier to put out future newsletter issues. If you're looking for other ideas, see the newsletter desk discussion page, where I have offered a number of suggestions for possible topics in various threads. If you plan to submit something, please chime in at the the "Post 2014 winter meetings edition" discussion thread. Thanks! isaacl (talk) 02:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Newyorkadam. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is WP:RX. Message added 22:28, 6 December 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.
We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.
Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you.
Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the December Blitz. Of the 14 editors who signed up for the blitz, 11 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
January drive: The January backlog-reduction drive is just around the corner; sign up
here!
Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015 is now underway. The voting period runs from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. Please cast your vote—it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!
As a member of WikiProject Bacon, I'm wishing you a very happy New Year's Eve and a great 2015! May your new year be filled with positive experiences, great wiki contributions, and of course, well-smoked thin-cut bacon. ~SuperHamsterTalkContribs01:41, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.
Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, 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. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk·contribs), Miyagawa (talk·contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk·contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Some strawberries to welcome you back to Wikipedia! By the way, you might want to look into setting up automatic archiving for your talk page (sorry I don't know where to link you to). Bananasoldier (talk) 07:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:George Zimmerman. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
I have recently launched a new downloads for beta testers that contains nightly builds of huggle, eg. versions that are built every day from our master branch and contains latest huggle. These builds are currently provided only for Windows and Ubuntu. You can find them here: http://huggle.wmflabs.org/builds/
Please keep in mind that these don't have any automatic updates and if you download and start using nightly build, you will need to update it yourself! So don't get yourself to running old version, it's possible to install both stable and nightly huggle, which is what I suggest.
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Public Ivy. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sam Sailor was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mikhaily Teh-White and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Hello! Newyorkadam,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -- SamSing!12:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Why is this showing up as Newyorkadam's submission? It looks from the history like it was drafted by someone else altogether. (I ask only because the Newyorkxxxx Cabal has to stick together.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
@Newyorkbrad: I'm not sure. I edited it most recently by closing a reference tag that was causing an error, and it seems as though the page auto-resubmitted the article to AfC for some reason. I certainly didn't mean to submit it to AfC, nor do I recall pressing the button to submit it. It appears that it was resubmitted in the same edit that I fixed the ref tag. -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:02, 19 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Please read WP:UP#CMT. It's some interesting stuff. I found the sentence that says "Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered users, from removing comments from their own talk pages." Almost poetic if you ask me. You could almost set it to song. --Jayron3201:36, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
@Jayron32: Alright, I just assumed that users were not allowed to remove warnings from their talk pages, as this might be seen as trying to hide they fact that they have been warned in the past. I don't understand why this comment is so condescending for my making a simple mistake. -Newyorkadam (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
TagPro, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you want to submit at AFC on behalf of another user, make sure to use {{subst:submit|user=username to submit as}}. In this diff of Draft:Caitlin Loeffler you used {{subst:submit}} resulting in the decline message being delivered to you. But "Pooping in the ocean, drawing fart bubbles coming out of a turtles butt on a middle school mural, Dookie Dookie Milkshake and driving a shart." should have told you right away that it was an attack page. It should never have been submitted. -- SamSing!03:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@Sam: I actually never meant to post the AfC in the first place. I'm clearing the backlog at Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting. For whatever reason when I click 'edit' on a page sometimes to fix it and save the page, it auto-submits the draft under my name, although I don't add {{subst:submit}}. I'm not sure why this is. I don't even pay attention to what the name of the article is; I just go through the category and fix the reference errors. -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hi Adam. Interesting. Forgive me if I made it sound like I implied you were doing it deliberately. OK, so what is going on? The Caitlin Loeffler draft has been deleted, but we have a similar case in Draft:Cody Lachey. Do you fix the incorrect ref tags by script? -- SamSing!10:57, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
@Sam Sailor: No worries. I go to [[Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting|the category page]] and open ~10 pages at a time, then click the 'Edit source' links at the top like I'd do for any other article. I first find the error then fix them manually, and press Save page. I don't do anything different from editing other articles. -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:14, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Alright, it happened. My only explanation is that when I edit the page it auto-places {{subst:submit}} in there for some reason. Do you think the same? -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Hmm, dunno yet, I'm still trying to understand what happens. I'll try to decline it now, but if I understand the template correctly, you will get the declined message here. -- SamSing!12:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, {{subst:submit}} showed up. I'm not sure if this is intended or not, or why it wouldn't happen to people who make the AfCs when they edit a page to add moar information to it. -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:33, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Well, now we know, that having pressed submit twice, has nothing to do with it. Also happens when we have pressed only once (our second test here). Look at Diff of Draft:Cody Lachey. He had submitted on 5 November. Yet no bot had been around. And then you fixed the ref tag yesterday. So why wasn't the draft visited by a bot? Do you know which bot it is? Could it have anything to do with the {{subst:submit}} being below the incorrect tag? -- SamSing!12:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure, it might be one of those things. Do you want me to try creating my own test AfC with a broken ref and you fix it? That way we can tell if it's just me (like maybe a preference I have enabled). -Newyorkadam (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
(edit conflict) Thanks for testing, let's keep both test pages up for now. I feel like doing some other tasks. If you know exactly where to turn to with this bug/situation, go ahead. Otherwise I'll return to it in a few hours. Thanks, -- SamSing!13:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Lixxx235 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:British Nigerian. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.
Can you please have a look over at Draft:Alex Gilbert. I have added serval sources. Let me know what you think, otherwise I will develop this article more!
Hi there! Last month you left a nice note on my talkpage and I don't think I ever responded. So here's a belated thank you! I'm happy to hear about Operation Lost starting back up again. Your notice reminded me that there are still many Lost articles to go. I've started expanded "Raised by Another" and "...In Translation" and plan to eventually nominate them for GA status. If you come across any information on them, let me know! Also, let me know if you need help on any articles (it looks like you were able to find production info on "White Rabbit"). Thanks! Ruby2010/201303:00, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
@Ruby2010: Hey! I'm currently working on Confidence Man, and I plan on going in chronological order. Yeah, I managed to find some production info on White Rabbit I actually just came across a great resource– an interview with Damon Lindelof for many episodes in Season 1, but unfortunately it looks like there aren't interviews for Raised by Another and ...In Translation. Thanks! -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Aha, wait! The interview for Solitary has some juicy production info on Raised by Another: " September 22, premiere week of 2004, at that moment in time, we were writing or breaking the stories for both "Raised by Another" and "Solitary." So we had gotten slightly behind, and we had to divide into two rooms, and David Fury was working on "Solitary," and the rest of the room was working on "Raised by Another." Carlton [Cuse], who had just started the week before, and I were sort of bouncing between the two universes. What happened was that when the network got the outlines for "Raised by Another," they started freaking out because the show had just premiered. Instead of saying, "We've got a hit on our hands, you guys do whatever you want to do," it was, "We've got a hit on our hands, don't do anything to fuck it up." They got really nervous."" And, "the other thing that "Raised by Another" presented was that Ethan had infiltrated our encampment. It's like, "Oh, is this show now going to be that there is all these other people on the Island, and every week they are going to be coming and having stories without folk?" We're like, "Rest assured, the story is still focused on these guys, but we need to introduce this threat because it is going to catalyze a different form of storytelling that's more intense and more in the now versus 'Hey, it's time to build the Swiss Family Robinson treehouse.'" It was a struggle for us to just do "Let's go find water" as a story. There does need to be a fundamental sense of tension and stakes behind it. And that's going to be represented by the fact that there are forces on this island that really don't want our castaways to get off it." -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
@Ruby2010: So it appears that ABC has redirected all of the old ABC Medianet viewership info to the Disney ABC Press homepage. Fortunately t looks like most of the abcmedianet links are archived on web.archive.org, and I've just added archive urls & dates to a few episodes. This change must have happened in the past week or two; the links were live when I was checking them two weeks ago. Just letting you know. -Newyorkadam (talk) 03:52, 13 March 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. SD0001 (talk) 20:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015
.jpg)
-Newyorkadam (talk) 04:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac (talk) 19:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
; see Talk:Pennsylvania Route 456 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
+2', I have two points, not three. I'll check on Batty's 16th edit, thanks for telling me. -Newyorkadam (talk) 22:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Carriearchdale (talk) 00:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Newyorkadam. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with [{{{2}}} this edit] to Ipomoea aquatica, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 03:13, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam (talk)
AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
) I'll take another look. And it's probably the game is very popular, so tons of edits. -Newyorkadam (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
; see Talk:Pilot (Lost) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pakaran -- Pakaran (talk) 16:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Done! -Newyorkadam (talk) 11:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
Godot13 (submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, 
Casliber (submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.
Sven Manguard (submissions) taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to 
12george1 (submissions) and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from 
Figureskatingfan (submissions), a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from 
Cloudz679 (submissions) and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of 
Previous issue | Index | Next issue 
Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
Casliber (submissions) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
Czar (submissions) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
12george1 (submissions) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
Bloom6132 (submissions), the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.
Matty.007 (submissions), 
ThaddeusB (submissions), 
WikiRedactor (submissions), 
Yellow Evan (submissions), 
Prism (submissions) and 
Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. 
ChrisGualtieri (submissions) wins the GA prize for 27 good articles in round 2 and the review prize for 28 good article reviews in round 1.
Caponer (submissions) wins the FL prize for three featured lists in round 2.
Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize his work on featured portals.
Figureskatingfan (submissions) wins the topic prize for a nine-article featured topic in round 3.
ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the news prize for 28 in the news articles in round 3.
_09.JPG){kind=link}
_11.JPG){kind=link}
_14.JPG){kind=link}
