This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ceranthor. 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.
On October 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ramapo Fault, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
No problem. Honestly, I can't complain. I get to have my article on the mainpage and have lots of Americans see it... that's awesome, either way! Thanks. ceranthor19:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
In this round of the WikiCup, the bottom three contestants of the top eight were eliminated on September 30th, while the top five continued for an additional month. On October 31, the WikiCup ended, and Durova was crowned winner!
Top 4
Durova (1830)
Ottava Rima (1720)
Sasata (1627)
Theleftorium (1149)
Eliminated 3
Candlewicke (586)
Mitchazenia (376)
Juliancolton (349)
Withdrawn
Shoemaker's Holiday (1224)
All scores are accurate as of the end of the WikiCup.
Content Leaders
As of this newsletter, the following is a list of participants in this round with the most:
Well, it was a long, long ride, with plenty of ups as well as downs (but I'm sure you'll agree, definitely more ups). It's been ten long months since our kick-off in January, and the level of competition has intensified so much so quickly. It's a wonder there was any puff left in our final eight by the end, but they fought to the death and, eventually, Durova pulled through, making her proficiency with FPs count as the contest drew to a close. Special mentions must go to the other members of the last four, Ottava Rima, Sasata and Theleftorium, all of whom put in a astonishing shift in their efforts to peel Durova away from her victory. Congratulations again!
The announcement of the ed17 as the newest judge to the WikiCup panel was made today - I wish him all the best in his new role.
The article for the Signpost overall is now be readable in a Signpost near you!
Remember to sign up for next year if you haven't already!
If you don't wish to receive this newsletter in the future, remove your name from this list. If you are not a participant, but would still like to receive this newsletter, feel free to add your name to the list.
WikiCup Awards
The 2009 WikiCup Participant Award
This WikiCup Award is presented to Ceranthor for their participation in the 2009 WikiCup. Your contributions along the way have greatly improved the quality of many articles, pictures, and sounds on the English Wikipedia.
I apologise for the accidental revert and warning. I went to revert it, but had already beaten me a couple seconds earlier, so I accidentally reverted you instead. Very sorry. --Meaghanguess who :)19:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
This one. I believe reported it in the wrong order, i.e. what I had listed as a suspected sock (the one you looked at and closed the case with) is the old blocked user. The current sock isn't blocked at all. Can you have a look, or possibly reopen the case again so I can change it? Thanks. Erzsébet Báthory(talk|contr.)21:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. If you're interested, there was a whole little fiasco over it. I gave the spot to Inner German Border, then someone wanted to move my article to the 10th, but another article was already there... *wipes brow* ;) ceranthor02:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Henry Allingham World War I contest
Hi, I've noticed that you decided to join the contest and create a submission page. First of all I'd like to thank you for this and invite you to pick up a flag and add your name here. Secondly, I wish to announce you that there is a possibility due to internal organization problems, that the contest would be postponed by 4-5 days. Thanks and best regards, --Eurocopter (talk) 18:22, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Happy to help, though it may be a day or so before I have the time to do anything. I realise there's a time factor involved, so I'll do my best :) EyeSerenetalk11:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Ceranthor; can you please check out the FAC on the article and weigh in on the ongoing comments on sourcing? SandyGeorgia has requested the supported reviewers comment on the discussion. Thanks, The Flash{talk}22:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, would you mind going back and supporting/commenting an second time? The entire FAC was restarted in order to clear some space at the FAC hub, which means any and all comments beforehand don't count. Thanks, The Flash{talk}22:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I saw you on the list of GA mentors and was hoping you might answer a quick question.
Another user and I have each submitted articles for GA related to histories of particular communities in Texas. Lacking a particularly good place to put them we put them in the "World History" topic. I notice, though, that it appears (to me) reviewers are deliberately skipping the articles seeming to pick instead articles related to histories of older civilizations (I know there is a backlog but it is frustrating to see articles processed out of order).
Question: Are we placing our articles in the wrong bin? Should we be placing these history articles in the Geography bin instead?
Hi, Mcorazao. Sorry for the belated response, I've been exceptionally busy. Both of the articles you nominated and the DYK you nom'd look great. I understand it's frustrating that your articles aren't getting reviewed - but that's the fatal flaw with GAN. If you'd like me to review one, I'd be sure to. Perhaps you can ask another reviewer to review the other article you nominated, as well. Your "friend" as you called them should also do this. Karanacs is an outstanding reviewer who writes Texas history articles, she should be able to be extremely helpful too. Hope this helps! ceranthor01:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. Certainly I am not looking for any special treatment. If you would like to review one of the articles I would much appreciate it. I have previously gotten help from Karanacs on Free State of Galveston and other stuff, and I have not really had an opportunity to return the favor. So I don't want to abuse her generous nature by asking for more favors so soon.
I see you have logged an oppose opinion in my RFA. If my request fails, how long would you recommend I wait before logging another request?--RadioFan (talk) 15:08, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Hey. The image is unsharp and therefore I doubt it will pass FPC. There are a number of commons image that could be nominated, if you look around the galleries. FPs are so much fun to find; they're so beautiful! Btw, could you comment here? The fac had 7 supports and some remaining stuff but was getting too old so it had to be restarted. Hope I helped. ceranthor13:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I just hope this stuff gets easier as it goes foward. I don't want another Loihi. I just can't stand grinding half a year on something again. I finally understand the exodus I suppose. It's nearly impossible to get an actual textual review; instead I get all this ALTS and REFS and IMAGES and other nonsense. ResMar16:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm just afraid I'm a bit biased when it comes to that article... I've copyedited it and stuff. If you want me to comment further, but not !vote, that'd be fine with me. It only gets easier, trust me. FAC #4 for me only took 10 days. ;) Number 5 isn't so cooperative. ceranthor16:30, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
It just doesn't work with the subsequently fired clause. It seems like you're saying Bale was not subsequently fired. Do you see what I mean? You just need to rewrite the sentence altogether, no biggie. I'm going to sleep now. :p Bye, ceranthor03:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand your concern that I "basically did nothing last year"; as far as I can tell, I have participated in every case I was not recused (drafted two), was diligent on all requests pages and did my share of the internal work. I've set the audit subcommittee into motion, and participated in the discussion around other reforms.
It's not nearly as extreme as you think. It's not that I think you don't do good work, I'm just not "whoa!" impressed by you. Please don't take that as an insult; I don't mean it to be one. Arbitrators should be articulate, well versed, and intelligent-you have all of those characteristics for sure but I'm not particularly sure you did good enough work to be re elected. If that doesn't make sense to you, send me an email and I can give you an elaborate response. Best, ceranthor21:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I am fine to handle with Elcobbola's image copyright problems. What I was trying to mention was Fifelfoo's references problems. Are you willing to help with this? It's just that I do not know enough about referencing so I'm likely not the user to fix such problems. BT (talk) 00:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Haha, BT no one can handle him. He's plunging things left and right with that stuff...I'll try and help you though :) ResMar00:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Black Tusk, no big deal. I'll look through google and see if there's anything you're missing. Since the article is already 52 kb, I doubt it, but, hey, you never know. ;) ceranthor01:04, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Well, if it's nothing to worry about then I wouldn't worry about it. I just don't want the candidate to fail over some stupid referencing problem..... BT (talk) 05:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Gz
The Volcanoes Barnstar
I'm very much suprised you haven;t gotten this one yet. You certainly deserve it for all your hard work. :) ResMar00:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
hi there. As you will see from the above page's history, and the FAC discussion, i changed my mind, and decided it actually needed a bit of work. I'm done for now, but have left one issue for consideration at the discussion. Hope i've helped. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
2010 WikiCup Signups Reconfirmation!
To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from this list! By removing your name, you are not removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup.
It's worth noting the rules have changed, likely after you signed up. The changes made thus far are:
Mainspace and/or portal edits will not be awarded points at all.
Did you know? articles (which were worth 5 points last year) will now be worth 10 points.
Good articles (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Valued pictures will be now awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
Featured lists (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Featured portals (which were worth 25 points last year) will now be worth 35 points.
Featured articles (which were worth 50 points last year) will now be worth 100 points.
Featured topics (which were worth 10 points per article last year) will now be worth 15 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
Good topics (which were worth 5 points per article last year) will now be worth 10 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
In the news will still be awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
If you have any final concerns about the WikiCup's rules and regulations, please ask them now, before the Cup begins to avoid last minute problems. You may come to the WikiCup's talk page, or any of the judge's user talk pages. We're looking forwards to a great 2010 WikiCup! On behalf of the WikiCup judges, iMatthewtalk at 03:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Well that's promosing news, as it brings my total to 5 points! Plus flexability in dating (the FeMO cruise is over a few days), that means that this is a good one. However, um redlink...? ResMar00:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
RfA
I fear your coding, especially since my spam template has apparently caused some havoc! So I'll just say thanks very much for participating in my RfA (passed (93/1/3). KV5 (Talk • Phils) 02:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that the FAC nomination for "Ode on a Grecian Urn" has been restarted. If you have a moment, feel free to take a look at the changes that have taken place since your last assessment and state any concerns you might have. Thanks Mrathel (talk) 14:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I have 2 articles sitting at GAN and Fifelfoo promised to go through the refs for Hawaii hotspot, which would be the final clearence I need to relist it at FAC (oh and something at DYK, too). In the meantime I'm open for shop; although I'm most definatly have to deal with all that stuff later, in the meantime I'm open to start that collab with you on Kilauea! One thing I want to point out however: it's a lot easier to clear the new 2c plunge going around from the beggining rather then rechecking all the refs later, so I want them to figure to what Fif told me here from the beggining.
I noticed your beautiful gesture in my watchlist ... The universe takes note of such things in the balance. (It told me so. :-) Cheers, and happy holidays. [no reply necessary, but some espresso would be nice] Proofreader77 (talk) 02:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
But thank you. It was something that needed saying, and besides, I'm relatively nobody so this is the best I can do for Ottava. I hope someone gives him another chance. ceranthor03:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Today, a voice without weight spoke on my behalf... I sobbed when I read it because it put all around it in context ... and tears come to my eyes now as I type this. One of the most beautiful things I have ever seen. And such is my way to notice. Bless you and your endeavors. Hail the Bard! :-) Proofreader77 (talk) 03:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
To conclude with a perfect quote from the canceled series Dollhouse, "This conversation is getting vague." :-) My true story from [today] says simply: "relatively unimportant" is not a constraint for action ... unless, of course, you don't want to be banned. lol (Lightness is usually more my style than pathos. Strange day.) Adieu. Proofreader77 (talk) 03:44, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Life in general
I'm still here; I haven't gone away. It's not as if I all of the sudden burnt out, I just don't feel like spending most of my life on Wikipedia. It's still fun, just not when you have 2000 edits a month. ~EDDY(talk/contribs/editor review)~ 21:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps you could consider doing a review of another editor? It takes a bit of time (reviews can take anywhere from about 30 minutes up to 2 hours, depending on how many contributions the editor has made, where they have contributed, etc).
The ones marked with a * are those editors who have not been reviewed yet - if you want to review one of these, make sure you remove the asterisks in the parts indicated!
If you have not done a review before, you might feel more comfortable giving a second review to an editor - this will show you an example of a review that has been done, and show you the kinds of things that can be commented on.
I hope that you find the review useful. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about it.
I think you should run RFA at the start of next year. I think you've addressed the concerns at RFA 2, certainly the perceived "maturity" issues. Tap me up for a nomination if you like (unless you go crazy between now and then!) or if not be assured of my strong support. Pedro : Chat 09:07, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
First of all, lol. Second, there's been some offline speculation... and the set date appears to be March. NuclearWarfare has offered to nom, and you, and Ched I believe... I can brief you via email if you want the full details. ceranthor21:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
We're moving right now, right, and whatever, but my parents don't even bother to tell me that because of this we'll have NO INTERNET FOR A WEEK! Luckily, I can still do it elsewhere, but my resources will be cut pretty severely...ResMar22:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:01, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
ER Thanks
Hello, Ceranthor! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent editor review. Thank you again for your view on my editing as I will be sure to keep your opinion and advice in mind!
On December 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Segula Volcano, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Oh, one thing, do you remember the code to make the two cells of the table equal in height? I forgot it and really need it...ResMar19:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I've made a proposal to bring the FA-Team out of inactivity—with a mission a bit different than we're used to. This is just a generic note I'm sending to members asking for their input. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 01:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
1997 Qayen earthquake
Thanks for your hard work on 1997 Qayen earthquake. I've revisited the article, copyedited a bit, and changed to a support. Please review the changes I made and make sure I didn't distort the meaning somehow. Also, note that I don't often see emails as I tend not to check email when I'm stressed - I am much more likely to notice a message on my talk page (that is kinda sad, isn't it?). Karanacs (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestions and support for Upper and Lower Table Rock... it was promoted today!. LittleMountain5 02:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
