User talk:Chrishmt0423

User Page

[[File:|35x35px|link=User_talk:Chrishmt0423|Talk]] Talk

Featured content

Sandbox (1, 2, 3)

Tools

Hello, welcome to my talk page! If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. So if you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page–my talk page–as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere. (I will break this rule sometime, if I want to get your attention quickly) I am busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. If I have reviewed an FLC for you, I have watchlisted the page, and will return within a reasonable time to Support, Oppose, or otherwise address your nomination. Reminders are unnecessary. Thanks.

Archive Archive 1 (December 2005 – June 2007) Archive 2 (June 2007 – October 2007) Archive 3 (October 2007 – March 2008) Archive 4 (March 2008 – July 2008) Archive 5 (July 2008 – September 2008) Archive 6 (September 2008 – January 2009) Archive 7 (January 2009 – June 2009) Archive 8 (June 2009 – November 2009) Archive 9 (November 2009 – June 2010) Archive 10 (June 2010 – February 2011) Archive 11 (February 2011 – March 2012) Archive 12 (March 2012 – April 2013)

—Bloom6132 (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is it within all those table guidelines to add the † to the year column instead and coloring it at NBA Rookie of the Year Award?—Bagumba (talk) 22:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, color is not required.—Chris!_c/t 23:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Just makes it easier to notice things without having to look for smaller symbols.—Bagumba (talk) 23:51, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Juwan Howard, which has recently become a WP:FA.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Sven Manguard (submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place Casliber (submissions) and second place Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.

The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.

A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 16:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I think this is D.J. White: [1] Zagalejo^^^ 17:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will request a name change.—Chris!_c/t 19:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am fairly a new Wikipedian and was hoping for some guidance. I am not sure if you are able to help me, or, if you could guide me in the right direction. I have studied the swaminaryan faith for the past three years. I have been making edits on certain articles that are backed by multiple soarurces and find my edits being reverted my multiple member of the organization in a cult like fashion. I own the two books below but wasn't sure how to cite them properly so I used the book links from google books. Many other people are helping me with my research and specifically my research partner has also assisted. Is there a way I can get some help on how to get articles from being reverted? I posted the criticism for Swaminarayan after finishing the research and plan to do the same for Pramukh Swami but the followers of the faith are tedious in removing any critical aspects.

I have followed this line of thinking by goethean when attack by BAPS followers on this debate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bochasanwasi_Shri_Akshar_Purushottam_Swaminarayan_Sanstha

He said "Wikipedia documents both positive and negative aspects of all organizations ...These organizations neither have authority over Wikipedia's content, nor do they offer infallible documentation of their organization. Wikipedia presents BAPS's perspective on itself, but it also presents other perspectives on BAPS. Taking any other course would be to allow Wikipedia to be censored and would virtually be the end of Wikipedia. If you want an article that presents BAPS in only a favorable light, then start your own wiki."

I believe you based on your work also adhere to this correct comment.

Thank You.

http://books.google.com/books?id=zrKdPTfog3oC&pg=PA143&lpg=PA143&dq=Swami+Dayananda+swaminarayan&source=bl&ots=HcxNprtz_8&sig=MqWUCjSe7B4-7Q63ViF1kg-P2eY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-kCxUbuUINLaqQHinYHIBQ&ved=0CEUQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=swaminarayan&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=tPkexi2EhAIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=raymond+williams+swaminarayan+women&hl=en&sa=X&ei=IkSxUciVLMS0rQGtkoHIBw&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=hindoos&f=false

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4379024

http://www.shikshapatri.org.uk/~shik/ Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Hey Chrishmt0423

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, Casliber (submissions) and Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Working my way there. Just going through my watchlist now. ;) Zagalejo^^^ 00:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, got em. Zagalejo^^^ 02:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signing between Tyler Hansbrough and the Toronto Raptors is official as of July 10, 2013 he was signed as a unrestricted free agent. 02:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMichael22 (talk • contribs)

Is there any statement from the Raptors themselves? I couldn't find anything on their website. Zagalejo^^^ 04:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I've done that myself. Zagalejo^^^ 03:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to say great job on the map you provided for the crash site. Very well done!! Magnum Serpentine (talk) 14:43, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting changes in the vertical alignment of the tables. The default vertical alignment looks like hell with large numbers of rowspans. Users shouldn't have to scroll through multiple screens to find out the date being referred to.

Sorry about the multiples earlier; the Database Locked window not mentioning that changes would be saved combined with the frustration of a week from hell combined to make a single comment look like a personal attack.

G. Timothy Walton (talk) 21:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We should but neither have been officially announced and both don't really have an official date. But true, I hadn't checked the roster and they are both there. The mavs suck at press releases so they both probably have been signed... DaHuzyBru (talk) 04:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about ask Zagalejo and see what he thinks. If it's on the roster, it should be official. DaHuzyBru (talk) 04:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See my long-winded reply at User_talk:DaHuzyBru#Question. I still don't think they have officially signed Ellis or Ellington. It's a complicated situation, but I think the most telling source is this article from the Mavs' website. It was published today, and talks about Calderon and Dalembert. It says that the Mavericks are "rumored to be involved in other signings that haven’t been announced by the team". Zagalejo^^^ 00:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for updating the List of African-American United States Cabinet Secretaries article per my suggestion on the article's Talk page. --TommyBoy (talk) 01:12, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zagalejo^^^ 05:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New San Francisco Arena, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ed Lee (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nate Robinson is OFFICIALLY a Denver Nuggets player...check official web page and re-edit it Thanks Riccardo811 Riccardo811 (talk) 20:49, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jordan Henriquez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baldwin, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

1. Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
2. Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
3. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
4. Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
5. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
6. Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
7. Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
8. Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association/Archive 23#NBA Coaches/Franchise template to try to achieve some consensus around how NBA franchise head coaches are displayed in templates. As an experienced WP:NBA editor, your opinion is requested. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 20:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Sasata (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of NBA champions may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Sports Reference LLC.}}</ref> in a 1–2–2–1–1 format during {{nbafy|1975}} and {{nbafy|1978}}).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/GSW/1975_games.html|title=1974–75

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:04, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I disagree with you that the navbox for the various NBA awards is redundant. Could you please explain how it is redundant? There is no other navbox like it.Hoops gza (talk) 23:10, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I see now what you mean, the template is already at the top of each of those pages. My mistake, sorry for the trouble.Hoops gza (talk) 23:12, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
2. Hawkeye7 (submissions)
3. Sasata (submissions)
4. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
5. Casliber (submissions)
6. Adam Cuerden (submissions)
7. Miyagawa (submissions)
8. Piotrus (submissions)
9. Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

• Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
• Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
• Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
• Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
• Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
• The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
• Finally, the judges are awarding Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 01:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it unnecessary to note the division leaders when they are automatically ranked 1st through 4th? Tampabay721 (talk) 02:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well of course it doesn't really matter right now. Technically it doesn't matter until the end of the regular season. Regardless, by not applying the "divisionxleader" parameter correctly, it has the possibility to mess up some of the division standings. For example, right now Miami is 1st in the Southeast but on {{2013–14 NBA Southeast standings}} it says they're 1 GB because they're 1 GB the Pacers in the conference standings. Tampabay721 (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem! It's a weird template. Last year the same thing happened and after a few days someone realized it was because those parameters were supposed to be in all lowercase. Tampabay721 (talk) 23:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chris, I thought I'll check with you if you were interested for an RfA. I've reviewed your contributions and feel they are outstanding. In case you were interested in an RfA, I could nominate you. Will await your reply. Kind regards. Wifione ^Message 04:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion. But I am not interested in an RFA.—Chris!_c/t 21:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. If you change your mind any time in the future, do drop me a line. Best regards. Wifione ^Message 09:31, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clark Quijano played for St Augustine International School with the school initials of AMA which is a participant of the Mariano Bondoc Cup. This is a league for Quezon City Schools. Tiong Lian is participated by chinese schools only. Jeron Teng of Xavier school was the one who scored 104 in a Tiong Lian game. Clark made the feat on the 7th Mariano Bondoc Cup and the league is currently on its 8th season P3x8975 (talk) 15:40, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for feedback on my proposed move here > Talk:Paul George (basketball). Thanks. BV ^talk 18:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]