User talk:Gatoclass/Archive 23

We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request to revisit the discussion. The initial hook has been struck, and two alternative hooks have been proposed. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've observed that the categorization of class articles and ship class categories for US Navy ships of the World War I and World War II eras is highly inconsistent, and I'm thinking of fixing it. One example is that in many cases the class articles are in, say, World War II cruisers of the United States, but the class categories are not. In some cases the reverse is true. Should both class articles and their class categories be in the appropriate parent categories? RobDuch (talk) 20:01, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My answer would probably be yes, RobDuch, but perhaps there are issues I haven't considered. I suggest you ask at WT:SHIPS, where most issues of this kind are resolved. Gatoclass (talk) 11:51, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. RobDuch (talk) 15:23, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You should have gotten an email from me about this - can you please either fill out the linked form, or email me if you didn't get it? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.

Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by Cyclonebiskit (submissions), and two each by MPJ-DK (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), and Cas Liber (submissions). Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by Adam Cuerden (submissions) (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with J Milburn (submissions) completing nine.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that Cas Liber (submissions) claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you're very experienced at coming up with April Fools hooks. I feel this hook has a lot of potential; would you be able to suggest something that could make it an April Fools hook? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 13:10, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did it as I noticed that there wasn't much movement going on with the decision so I was being bold and after all it only says "generally discouraged", not that you can't do it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, The C of E, but one this occasion you haven't just promoted your own hook, you've chosen your own preferred hook over hooks nominated by others. Gatoclass (talk) 11:29, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's because that was the hook that was checked and passed by Silver Seren and agreed by Daniel Case. The others and succeeding comments did not use any overriding icons thus in my view the original review remains valid for the original hook to be promoted. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The C of E, you know that there was a discussion about the appropriateness of the original hook. Notecardforfree agreed to allow the hook choice to be made by a "neutral, third party". You don't fit that description. Gatoclass (talk) 11:51, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus was already there from 3 people (myself, SS and DC) who had commented that there was nothing wrong with the hook as passed. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The C of E, you nominated the article, so your endorsement is discounted. Daniel Case did not endorse your hook. Silverseren initially endorsed it, but did not respond to Notecard's second and subsequent objections, indicating assent. Notecard said he would accept a hook selection by a "neutral, third party", an approach I endorse. You should reverse your promotion, and allow the hook to be selected by a neutral third party as proposed. Gatoclass (talk) 12:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked Cwmhiraeth if she would be prepared to give that 3rd party opinion. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I basically agree with Notecardforfree. How about

• ALT6 ... that United States v. One Tyrannosaurus Bataar Skeleton involved a dinosaur that entered the United States illegally? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not hooky enough IMO. Gatoclass (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USS Appling (APA-58).jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:48, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello, Kelly. You could have asked me about these images rather than spamming my talk page with messages. I believe these images are freely distributable, per the image use policy on the Navsource website which reads: Please show some respect and credit those who have contributed photos to this archive(*). Their names are listed next to the photo lInk. Copyrighted images will appear as © Name. (my emphasis).[1] None of the images I uploaded have the copyright symbol (©) next to the contributor's name. Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USS Telfair (APA-210).jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:49, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSBarnstable(APA93).jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:50, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSBurleighAPA95.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:50, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSCallawayAPA35.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSCavalier(APA-37).jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:52, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSCecilAPA96.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:53, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSDadeAPA40.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSElmoreAPA42.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:54, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSFayetteAPA43.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSFremontAPA44.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSGrafton(APA-109).jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSHamptonAPA115.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:58, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSWestmorelandAPA104.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:58, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSMendocinoAPA100.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:02, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:USSKnoxAPA46.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:03, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:SS Aiken Victory.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:34, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! So my nomination of Sam Pepper was recently removed from prep, to which I responded back in the current discussion of the removal in WT:DYK. I see that you were also involved in the discussion and I would like a response back to clear up the situation, as well as hopefully revive the removed hook. Thank you! Sekyaw (talk) 19:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Sekyaw, I saw your comment yesterday but was unable to find time to respond to it, and I don't have time to discuss it right now either as I am about to log off. But the short answer to your query is that it isn't always easy to make a judgement call about what is a violation of BLP or not. In my view, if there are doubts about an article, it probably shouldn't be featured at DYK. And with regard to this one, the subject seems to be an average joe who has attempted to gain fame by pulling some silly pranks that have upset a lot of people. I'm really not sure Wikipedia should be immortalizing this guy's brief episode of poor judgement with a biography at all, let alone a spot on the main page. Gatoclass (talk) 19:20, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. You're the only one the actually responded, and I guess no one else will continue the discussion at WT:DYK, so I guess it's unfortunately closed. I still have my arguements, and I still feel that the hook had the potential to stay and get promoted, but I guess it isn't entirely up to me haha. Thanks once again :) Sekyaw (talk) 05:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your free one-year account with Newspapers.com will end on April 28 2016. Newspapers.com has offered to extend existing accounts by another year. If you wish to keep your account until April 28 2017, please add your name to the Account Renewal list here. I'll let Newspapers.com customer support know, and they will extend your subscription. If you don't want to keep your account for another year, you don't have to do anything. Your account will expire unless I hear from you that you want to keep it. HazelAB (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass, the hook in Prep 5, the one for Augusto Barbera that says "on this day", needs to be moved to Prep 4 now that it's going to be promoted late. Otherwise, it will run for several hours on the following day (UTC). Thanks, and sorry if this adds to your checking. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Gatoclass (talk) 02:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out that both of the Prep 5 hooks were special occasion hooks, and both needed moving, which I've just done. Hope that isn't a problem. I swapped out the second and quirky hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So some Wikipedia officials ('Denisarona' and 'Gatoclass') really think these people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Nahariya_attack) are 'militants'? So the word 'terrorist' is somehow too sensitive, is it? Let's just take a look here at the immorality of this fudge. Look at the heinous crimes these people committed. Ask yourselves, are these terrorist acts? There is only one answer. In all conscience. Shame on you for bowdlerlising this. So these Wikipedia 'officials', Denisarona and Gatoclass, are changing my edits to make these people appear to be what they are not. These criminals are NOT 'moderates', they are, for sure, with no shadow of a doubt, terrorists. Just read the details of their crimes. Thank you so much.86.147.116.3 (talk) 20:08, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note. I appreciate that you are also a person of moral absolutes, but there is a Wikipedia 'protocol' here that means you/we can't quite call a spade a spade. But these were evil, filthy, terrorist acts, we can all see that. By the wya, I am not a 'sockpuppet'..some ISPs outside the US regularly swap IP addresses!86.163.88.90 (talk) 18:46, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass, I was wondering whether you were satisfied with the nominator's solution to the sourcing issue that caused you to pull this promoted article. Please respond there when you get the chance. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:33, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.

Round 2 saw three FAs (two by Cas Liber (submissions) and one by Montanabw (submissions)), four Featured Lists (with three by Calvin999 (submissions)), and 53 Good Articles (six by Worm That Turned (submissions) and five each by Hurricanehink (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions), and MPJ-DK (submissions)). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by Adam Cuerden (submissions) and five by Godot13 (submissions)). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) scored 265 base points, while The C of E (submissions) and MPJ-DK (submissions) each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with MPJ-DK (submissions) completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and Cas Liber (submissions), broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

— Maile (talk) 13:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work on this. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 16:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! You're welcome :) Gatoclass (talk) 16:52, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a week passes and we already have a DYK about Fast 8 on the front page.--Catlemur (talk) 16:39, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well it says principle photography began on that film, so it passes WP:NOTFILM. Gatoclass (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So you patronise as well as exhibit some sophistry. These were terrorist acts, and you know it. Why the equivocation? Enjoy your small victory of being some sort of wikipedia policeman.

Your scrawl: "Hello 86, I know there is quite a learning curve for new users on Wikipedia, but we have a policy on this, called WP:TERRORIST, which states that the word "terrorist" should not be used except in certain circumstances. Why? Well because, as the saying goes, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, and vice versa. In other words, these are loaded terms that often depend on one's political views. As Wikipedia strives to be neutral, we try to avoid such terms where possible" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.116.3 (talk) 19:35, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Sotomayor

As you can see here, these three accounts have been vandalizing the Tommy Sotomayor Wikipedia page again, this page was protected because of repeated vandalism, not the protection status is gone and the vandals are back:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/62.12.67.139

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2601:601:E00:309C:7CE5:D6AC:BFB1:2DE3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FCC8:C7C6:4A00:1017:FC58:F62E:E066

If you could possibly block these accounts and IP addresses, thanks. Neptune's Trident (talk) 06:02, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Neptune's Trident, I don't have time to look into this now. I suggest you post your complaint to WP:AN/I. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 13:13, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing this message to you because you put yourself down as a regular admin at DYK.

Per this AN thread, LavaBaron is given editing restrictions on DYK. Any hook nominated or reviewed by LavaBaron must be reviewed by a second editor before it may be promoted to the main page. The restrictions are reproduced below as follows:

1. A DYK article nomination or hook submitted by LavaBaron must be reviewed and accepted by 2 other editors before it may be promoted.
2. Any DYK nomination reviewed by LavaBaron must also be reviewed and accepted by 1 other editor before it may be promoted.
3. Any additional reviews by other editors, which are mandated by this restriction, shall count towards the QPQ of that editor.
4. (To balance the maths) For each article submitted by LavaBaron to DYK, 2 QPQ reviews by LavaBaron are required, at least 1 of which shall be a nomination that had not yet been accepted by another editor.
5. These restrictions shall initially last for a period of 3 months. At the end of the period, this restriction shall be reviewed.

--Deryck C. 13:45, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gatoclass. I thought I'd pop over her to discuss QPQ, the need for it and so on. The whole point of QPQ is that the reviews get done, ensuring that we don't have massive backlogs. User:Staceydolxx and I between us have reviewed more articles than we have nominated, and have spent time in both promoting and admin promoting. As long as the articles are being reviewed, I'm unsure about why it might be an issue. I'm certainly happy to discuss at a wider forum if you like? Worm^TT(talk) 14:05, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Worm That Turned, I decided to pass your article after your explanation but said I would need more time to think about the overall issue. It has occurred to me in the past that QPQ could be gamed in certain ways, and while I very much doubt either you or Stacey would attempt to game the system, it might set a problematic precedent. So, as I said, I need more time to think about this as a matter of principle. If I decide there are valid concerns, I will bring it up at WT:DYK and invite you to the discussion, if you are interested. Gatoclass (talk) 14:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. I can see how issues may arise, and if there's anything we can do to help out with your thoughts then feel free to discuss further here or at WT:DYK. You may notice that we have 4 nominations in at the moment, Stacey did all the QPQ reviews, so it might well come up again :) Worm^TT(talk) 14:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Persian Gulf Medal of Honor
	Hello dear Gatoclass, Persian Gulf Medal of Honor of Iran has been given you for your special services to wiki, specially the DYK in Wikipedia. thank you so much. The Stray Dog by Sadeq Hedayat 19:44, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's an unexpected bonus. Thank you very much, TheStrayDog :)

Re David Dahl blurb, I think "waiting for it to heal" works very well. Good job. Sca (talk) 17:24, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the interruption, however, in the ANI thread open with reference to me right now, it seems there is a request for me to be blocked as I haven't responded to allegations set out in it. However, as per Ritchie333's advice and a previous commitment I made to him here, I said I would not reply in that thread which is the reason for my silence. I'm exceptionally concerned at this point as this is the same situation that resulted in the bad block to which I was recently subjected; immediately after I disengaged, demands were introduced that I start answering a variety of questions and my continued silence was used as casus belli to summon a blocking admin. Once I provided diffs in the block appeal it was immediately rescinded, but the damage to my block log was done. [2]
I would really like not to have to go through that again. Can I post my full and detailed defense on your wall and can you proxy re-post it to the AN thread? Then maybe I can continue posting to your wall and you can continue re-posting it as the debate evolves and expands over time? That way I will not violate the terms of my disengagement promise and I will also avoid being blocked for failure to respond.
Sorry for this intrusive request, but I'm at a loss of what else to do as, once again, I will be blocked if I reply and blocked if I don't reply. While I'm confident in my ability to respond satisfactorily to any question I'd rather do it in the initial discussion than in an appeal of the block it appears I'm being gently navigated into. LavaBaron (talk) 17:36, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have composed the itemization of diffs here, off-AN. I'm hoping this will maintain my commitment to disengage by not posting in the thread. LavaBaron (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LavaBaron, I haven't seen any proposal to have you blocked. Are you talking about the proposed DYK ban? That appears to be failing - in which case, any more posts from you at this point, proxied or not, are only likely to be counterproductive. Gatoclass (talk) 05:41, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sorry I overreacted. Once it started failing, there was a Hail Mary post from the OP for an 'uninvolved admin' to evaluate my comments for personal attacks. These were the signal words that were used last time moments before my bad block, so I freaked. Anyway, sorry for posting a WALLOFTEXT to your page. LavaBaron (talk) 01:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gatoclass, Noticed your edit on page Harrild & Sons. This was a nice addition and thank you for your contribution. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 14:35, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At Template:Did you know nominations/The Decline of the American Empire you commented my article was a little short of a genuine 5x expansion. My question is, how do you know? I would like to nominate The Barbarian Invasions and would like to know if it genuinely qualifies. Ribbet32 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ribbet32, you need a prose counting program. I use DYK check, but there are others available. I think you have to embed the code in a special user page, but have forgotten the details. Maile66 usually has a good grasp of technical issues, perhaps he can help. Gatoclass (talk) 07:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ribbet32, DYKcheck is the same tool I use. DYKcheck is the information on it. If you install it, you will then see "DYK check" in the Tools in the left-hand sidebar. This is how you install it:

Click on User:Ribbet32/common.js. Copy and paste the below script, exactly as it is written including "importScript" in the edit window and then Save:

importScript('User:Shubinator/DYKcheck.js'); //DYKcheck tool

After you have it installed, pull up any article. Click on DYK check in the Tools sidebar. You will then see it quickly calculates DYK eligibility scan results, which includes all the basic details of who created the article and when, prose size, how old it is, whether or not it was expanded, etc. Good luck. This is a very useful tool. — Maile (talk) 11:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maile66, I see mine is pasted into monobook.js rather than common.js. Does that make any difference? Gatoclass (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It makes no difference whatsoever, except to say that maybe you use monobook skin. As long as it's in one of the .js - I use common.js because sometimes I change skins, and common.js seems to work with them all. — Maile (talk) 11:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Ribbet32, in answer to your question about The Barbarian Invasions, it does not qualify for 5X expansion. I went into the History, clicked on 26 August 2016, the date right before you started expanding. Then I clicked on DYK check. It said the size on that date was 3840 characters (0 words) "readable prose size". 3840 x 5 = 19200. It's current size is 10153 characters (0 words) "readable prose size" — Maile (talk) 11:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gatoclass, thank you for your help. I opted to instead nominate Template:Did you know nominations/Léolo, which has an 8.75 times expansion, but it has not received a human reviewer in a week and I'm a little concerned it'll time out, if it hasn't already. Would you be very kind enough to take a look? Ribbet32 (talk) 04:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ribbet32, sorry for the delay in responding, I got distracted and forgot about this post. I don't have time to review your nomination right now, but rest assured it won't go anywhere until it's been reviewed, as nominations do not "time out" at DYK. Gatoclass (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you for copyediting of Mijo Babić and going an extra mile with this comment. Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Gatoclass (talk) 08:55, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted to take the time to apologize for my behavior in DYK. I was taking everything way too seriously and personally for no good reason. I greatly appreciate your feedback and I need to better at taking and responding to constructive criticism as that is the only way to further develop one's skills. I promise to be better in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 22:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize Aoba47, perhaps neither of us responded ideally in that thread. I suggest we just forget about it and move on ;) Gatoclass (talk) 10:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I look forward to working with you in the future. I hope you are having a wonderful day. :-) Aoba47 (talk) 15:38, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator Andrew Davidson and User:Barabbas1312 have provided responses to your concerns at the nomination page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:24, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, while the addition of "of its type" to the hook is true, it is actually the oldest still promoted wrestling championship anywhere in the world, adding "of its type" downgrades it unnessarily IMO.  MPJ-DK  16:16, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK, it doesn't "downgrade it unnecessarily", "its type" is professional wrestling championships, not Mexican professional wrestling championships. If you don't add "of its type", the hook is FAR too broad, as it covers championships of ANY type. Gatoclass (talk) 17:02, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have given the hook a tweak to accommodate your concern. Gatoclass (talk) 17:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I kindly ask you help me about mu DYK-nom Template:Did you know nominations/Akıncı Air Base, which is in trouble. Thank you. CeeGee 06:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

With all that's wrong with DYK -- the jibberish hooks, the assertions completely defying common sense -- it's amazing the shit that gets fussed over [3]. You got it right: I chose bits exactly for its informality, and it was fine. TRM's idea that "sections" is "correct" is nonsense, because DYK isn't a railroad procedures manual. All that discussion over nothing. EEng 17:41, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Gatoclass, I see there was a quasi-kerfuffle about David Suhor appearing on the Main Page along with a ref to the Church of England and that you moved it to Halloween. But it doesn't appear there in the nominations page. Talk:David Suhor states it appeared in DYK on Oct. 4, but according to Wikipedia:Main Page history/2016 October 4, it did not. My own The Best Intentions was on DYK that day, and I did not notice a ref to a Satanic prayer there. Methinks David Suhor got lost in the jumble. Ribbet32 (talk) 02:37, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information, Ribbet32. The reason the Suhor article got an appearance credit is because I neglected to remove the credit, here, when I moved the hook out of the set for that day. The Suhor hook is presumably not appearing on the nominations page now because it got moved back into prep since being returned. Gatoclass (talk) 08:26, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the lead hook is missing the word (pictured). I would also insert "the" before the name of the plant. Best, Yoninah (talk) 19:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did a copyvio check to ensure that there wasn't an issue - which source do you believe that there was close paraphrasing and I'll go back and re-edit. Dan arndt (talk) 15:10, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback - changes done. Dan arndt (talk) 05:16, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After you held up Template:Did you know nominations/Katharine Fuge because you didn't look closely at the source, would you please return to it? I'd appreciate if you'd let me know what was missing. I really thought the reference after the mentioning in the body of the article would be enough, - a very diligent listing even of which cantata on which volume of the BCP (Bach Cantata Pilgrimage). If not, what's needed? Reviewer Yoninah was obviously able to verify the fact. - I'd also appreciate a modification or explanation of "repeatedly" in your first comment there. It hurts, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda Arendt - yes I think it's probably okay to return to prep but I will have to take another look at it first, and haven't found time to do so yet. Gatoclass (talk) 13:25, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These are the University run by Govt. and i think these all are in see also tab. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IamRobinSharaya (talk • contribs) 07:54, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass, just a friendly reminder that this nomination is waiting on you to proceed. I hope you're able to get to it soon. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time. The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

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

Gatoclass, the final decision on this one has been left to you. Please stop by and make it as soon as possible. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:01, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gatoclass.

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

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

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass, you originally pulled this nomination from prep, and did a bit of cleanup to the original hook and gave a new version which I have just labeled ALT2.

The nomination has stalled, and I was wondering whether you could take a look and see whether the copyedit and subsequent fixes have gotten it to the point where it's ready for a new reviewer (and if not, what's left to do). Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:24, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It has just been passed, so it would be great if you could take a look now before someone comes along to promote it to be sure it's okay; it would be a shame to have it pulled again, since it's likely to be promoted in short order. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass, it would be great if you could take a look at Maury Markowitz's latest comment on this one, and respond as soon as possible. The nomination's now the second oldest at over three months, and if we could get it settled that would be great. Many thanks for all your hard work at DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.

For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):

• First place – $200
• Second & Third place – $50 each
• Category prizes – $25 per category (which will be limited to FA, FL, FP, GA, and DYK for 2017). Winning a category prize does not require making it to the final round.

Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address.

After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.

The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email).

Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for standing up for me in the DYK discussion today. I had to leave it in mid-flow as real life intruded. My whole purpose in bringing the matter up to start with was to try to avoid an embarrassing Christmas Day pull when someone noticed that the "peace" bit was incorrect. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, per the discussion at WT:DYK, would you mind going ahead and shortening this hook:

• ... that Jessamyn Rodriguez earned a Master Baker certificate before founding a social enterprise teaching bread-making and job skills to low-income minority women and immigrants?

to:

• ... that Jessamyn Rodriguez founded a social enterprise teaching bread-making and job skills to low-income minority women and immigrants?

(Since it's my hook, I don't think I'm supposed to touch it while it's in prep.) Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:35, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]