User talk:Resolute

Archives

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11

Hi Resolute, I'm getting to work on this TFA text now. Feel free to tweak it. - Dank (push to talk) 22:10, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll look it, and the article, over sometime in the next couple days. Resolute 00:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dank: - Man, I totally forgot about this! I already have a proposed TFA blurb for Richard in my sandbox. The goal was a blurb with as many high quality articles as I could come up with. That proposal has 4 FAs, 2 FLs and 3GAs in it. Which, I hope, would be some sort of record. Resolute 12:54, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I need to do a character count on that, could you get rid of the icons? - Dank (push to talk) 13:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done - see same link. I created that one when toying with the idea of a TFA blurb that was all GA or better links. Sort of burned out before the finish though. Resolute 13:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, that's 988. 1025 is generally as low as I go, can you give it a little more? - Dank (push to talk) 13:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just dropped a sentence from your proposed TFA blurb in - though it might overload the back end with "on date x, y occurred" comments. Could use a little more tweaking. In either case, I think the Richard Riot and The Hockey Sweater notes need to be there, as both are significant examples of Richard's impact on Canadian history and culture. Resolute 14:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've transferred it to the TFA page. - Dank (push to talk) 14:29, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

During a recent lengthy discussion on the WP:FAC talkpage, several ideas were put forward as to how this procedure could be improved, particularly in making it more user-friendly towards first-time nominees. The promotion rate for first-timers at FAC is depressingly low – around 16 percent – which is a cause for concern. To help remedy this, Mike Christie and I, with the co-operation of the FAC coordinators, have devised a voluntary mentoring scheme, in which newcomers will guided by more experienced editors through the stages of preparation and submission of their articles. The general format of the scheme is explained in more detail on Wikipedia: Mentoring for FAC, which also includes a list of editors who have indicated that they are prepared to act as mentors.

Would you be prepared to take on this role occasionally? If so, please add your name to the list. By doing so you incur no obligation; it will be entirely for you to decide how often and on which articles you want to act in this capacity. We anticipate that the scheme will have a trial run for a few months before we appraise its effectiveness. Your participation will be most welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 21:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Resolute. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your edit on the Matthews article, but I'm just letting you know that while Malone and Hyland scored 5 in their NHL debuts, they had previously played for the NHA and are thus not considered rookies by the NHL. Source. Spilia4 (talk) 02:26, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Spilia4: - In fairness, there was no such concept as a "rookie" in 1917 and we can't really utilize a modern concept anachronistically like that. However, the claim that Matthews was the first to score four goals in his NHL debut is flat wrong, and that is what I removed. Once the media sorts itself out, there will surely be a citeable and correct statement like "first in modern history" that we can use to puff up his remarkably impressive achievement. Cheers! Resolute 02:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Resolute: I can agree to that, but the same argument can made made for what is considered a dynasty (3 cups in 5 years). Due to a lack of salary cap, it was much easier to win 3 in 5 than it is now, and while most would consider the current Blackhawks a dynasty, the NHL does not. Same for Matthews and his 4 goals. However, I am updating the Matthews article now and will include both the 4 goal "record" alongside an explanation of Malone and Hyland's accomplishments, as this is the consensus as of now.Spilia4 (talk) 02:40, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I certainly would not consider the Hawks a dynasty.  ;) But yes, an explanatory note would be a must if we are going to treat this as a record, so good call there. Resolute 02:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Spilia4:- Actually as far as dynasties go we actually know what are officially recognized as a dynasty by the NHL. There are 9 teams. This is what the Dynasty (sports) uses as a reference for dynasties in hockey. The cutoff the NHL/HHOF seems to use is at least 4 championships. The Ottawa Senators taking 8 years to do so being the longest time frame, so it is still possible for them to join the list. -DJSasso (talk) 13:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just misread your comment I realize, you already probably know. Based on arguments I have seen online, it is really only Blackhawks fans who think they are a dynasty. ;) -DJSasso (talk) 13:50, 20 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]

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) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a thread at ANI at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Move_discussion_going_nowhere_quickly about a discussion in which you have been involved. Your are welcome to contribute to the thread at ANI, DuncanHill (talk) 23:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Resolute.

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]

Hello, Resolute. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 22 November 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]

Hey Resolute. I see you have not been so active lately, but I thought I'd try my luck. I initiated a PR for Joe Warbrick and was hoping you'd have some time to take a look. The Bot is down (since November!) so the request isn't even listed at WP:PR. The review can be found at Wikipedia:Peer review/Joe Warbrick/archive1. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks! -- Shudde ^talk 10:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox ice hockey team season has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox KHL team season. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Resolute, as a past commenter on previous SPIs involving UrbanNerd, just want to advise of the latest whack-a-mole SPI here. Hope all is well. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 03:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now there is a name I haven't heard in awhile. I forget if I am considered "involved" with him so I will let someone else handle it. -DJSasso (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, the resiliency of trolls is impressive, if nothing else. Resolute 19:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To unearth an old memory, Resolute, this troll is probably reeling that the Calgary CMA officially usurped the Ottawa-Gatineau CMA as fourth largest in Canada yesterday, and threatened that the Edmonton CMA is now ~2K back. [1] I'd antagonize him but won't sink to his level. That is his MO.
Didn't realize you were retired. I assume retired from adminship, but it appears your editing frequency is down too. You sun setting on that front as well? Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 20:14, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Burned out on research/editing a while ago. Without that, all that's left is the meta-arguments - which weren't fun at the best of times - and reverting back when people "fix" the fact that the Frank Slide happened when the town was in the NWT. I still poke around, but desire is very low. Resolute 23:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not to pressure you or anything, but I kind of got an idea to create a decent bibliography of hockey-related books to ultimately post somewhere here for general use (in that it would be a guide of what books to use and so on). Now I do plan to present it to WT:HOCKEY eventually, but wanted to see if you'd be up for adding anything, as I know you probably have a decent idea of what else to add (and got the more detailed knowledge of Alberta hockey). Like I said not a big deal either way, and obviously no immediate need to act, but thought I'd mention it in case you're interested. The list is currently living at User:Kaiser matias/Bibliography, so feel free to take a look. Kaiser matias (talk) 01:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah for sure, whenever you feel like adding feel free to. And I can relate to being retired, was mostly at that point the past while, but now have too much free time so needed to occupy it somehow. Kaiser matias (talk) 14:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks saw you added a whole stash of things. Knew you had some interesting titles there, which is partly why I did this; want to see what else I should be perusing for my own curiosity. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:05, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yw. Most of my other references you already had listed. About the only exception is the 150 or so media guides I have. Resolute 23:06, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:

• Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
• Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
• 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
• Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
• 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
• Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
• Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Resolute. I'm just posting to let you know that List of NHL players with 50-goal seasons – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for July 3. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Resolute. I was wondering; is there a discussion underway (outside of the Gard page) concerning proper naming of children? You alluded to an MOS discussion but I'm not finding it. Perhaps I'm not looking in the right place. Thanks, Coretheapple (talk) 16:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Coretheapple: I came aware of this discussion via a request for input made at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#Should we use forenames or surnames for children?. Resolute 17:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there it is. I was looking on the main MOS talk page. Thanks. Coretheapple (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Note that I didn't initiate the report, but I noticed you've been mentioned and not notified by Bluhaze777. —C.Fred (talk) 17:42, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada will soon be reaching its first-anniversary. Please consider submitting any Canada-related articles you have created or improved since November 2016. Please try to ensure that all entries are sourced with formatted citations and no unsourced claims.

You may submit articles using this link for convenience. Thank-you, and please spread the word to those you know who might be interested in joining this effort to improve the quality of Canada-related articles. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:13, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you remember the Hunter Brothers when they played in the WHL? They are a music group now. I added the hockey to their wiki article as I didn't think any of them notable enough for a separate article. Flibirigit (talk) 18:08, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, a couple of the names ring a bell. And definitely a good call on not creating separate articles. It does not appear that either their junior hockey nor their music careers warrant individual articles at this point. I suppose someone could complain that the hockey part of their background is WP:UNDUE, but that should also balance out if their music careers take off and more backgrounder stories are written.

Good point. I tried to keep it very short and referenced. Flibirigit (talk) 22:27, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the Halifax explosion article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 6, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 6, 2017.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:19, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Resolute, I know you're a member for both WikiProject Canada and Ice Hockey. I was hoping you might be able to add some insight to this discussion: Template talk:Infobox ice hockey player. Thanks again. Flibirigit (talk) 17:35, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Resolute. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I finally got around to cleaning up the David Branch article. Take a look ! Flibirigit (talk) 08:35, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a major improvement! Resolute 20:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was critically bad for a long time, and much needed. I'm caching up on the CHL articles. I also had fun rewriting Bill LaForge last week. Hope to see you online more. Flibirigit (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Resolute. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I finally got around to writing an article for Joe Kryczka. I'm am sure Calgarians know the name. Hope you enjoy reading it. Flibirigit (talk) 05:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Damn... nice article! Resolute 14:07, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I hope to put it through the GA process when I have a bit more free time. Flibirigit (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the Paul Henderson article has been scheduled to be rerun as today's featured article for January 28, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 28, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors on the day before and the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:34, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak:. Well, this is surprising. I'll admit that being retired, I haven't paid much attention to the TFA process in some time, but this article already ran in 2014. We are now allowing repeat TFAs, I assume? Cheers! Resolute 16:01, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I believe they are. -DJSasso (talk) 18:28, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the supply of new FAs has for some time been less than required to replace the daily TFA requirement, so we can re-run up to one old FA a week, as long as they it was first run at least five years ago. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Foundation has invited the various Wikimedia communities, including the English Wikipedia, to participate in a consultation on improving communication methods within the Wikimedia projects. As such, a request for comment has been created at Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019. You are invited to express your views in the discussion. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 05:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:32, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see you're still around (sometimes?). Hope you've enjoyed your time away from Wikipedia. isaacl (talk) 01:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you might be interested in the expansions to W. G. Hardy and the Western Canada Senior Hockey League. I recently created the International Ice Hockey Association article too. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know you don't get online much lately, but I thought you might be interested in Ron Butlin (ice hockey) and Canadian Hockey Association (1968–1970). I recently researched and wrote them. Flibirigit (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Buried Treasure(My Name Is Earl). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Buried Treasure(My Name Is Earl) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Gonnym (talk) 10:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For this factual edit summary. It's sad that people do that just to be "the one that gets to create the article". Mwiqdoh (talk) 03:54, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:GarySouthshoreRailcats.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. IagoQnsi (talk) 03:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive: On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

		The Hockey Barnstar
		... you are the first recipient of the Hockey Barnstar with Crossed Sticks and Diamonds for your magnificent and unprecedented efforts! Well done! Ravenswing 04:40, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks! I may obviously be retired these days, but I still remember the fun we had when this project was young. Cheers! Resolute 03:03, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of Canadian Hockey League awards has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Subject fails WP:LISTN and duplicates the information at the Canadian Hockey League, Ontario Hockey League, Quebec Major Junior Hockey League, and Western Hockey League.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Flibirigit (talk) 17:57, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Summer Olympics has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of August 2023.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 02:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Job Done
		Awarded to Resolute for good services as an admin, and for resigning the tools in a noble manner. SilkTork (talk) 23:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your contributions over the years. If you're checking in sometime, hope to see you preserving your work at the Montreal Expos article against those continually trying to slip things in! Good luck! isaacl (talk) 00:54, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do still look in from time to time, yeah. Just burnt out completely on the editing. Glad to see there are a few of the old crew still about! Resolute 02:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zoe Arancini has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. LibStar (talk) 00:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bobby Bauer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:05, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are enjoying your non-Wikipedia pastimes! If you have a bit of time to spare, could you look at this diff and, if you still have access to the source, confirm that the addition to the quote is accurate? I don't really think the added content is necessary, but if it's accurate, it's probably not worth arguing about it. Thanks! isaacl (talk) 16:49, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... and the edit has been reverted. As I recall from another book of theirs, Remembering the Montreal Expos, the authors have a very conversational, opinionated style, so the addition seemed plausible to me. (Their writing style is why, although I'm sure I'd learn new tidbits about 1994 as I did from Remembering, I'm not eager to acquire the book just to validate the quote.) isaacl (talk) 16:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 07:06, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Calgarypuck, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calgarypuck until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wildrose Party has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NHL team abbreviations has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Calgary Flames Barnstar
		You already have the Hockey Barnstar, so here's another piece for the mantle. Recently, I've been doing a revamp of Hockey Mountain, and I've gotten to see how much you've contributed to the sport of hockey on Wikipedia. Your endless contributions to Calgary Flames-related articles have inspired me to do something similar with the Seattle Kraken. Needless to say, you have made a great impact on not only Calgary Flames articles, but the entire hockey WikiProject, which is why I award you this specially-made barnstar! XR228 (talk) 19:22, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it! Thank you. Resolute 23:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of the National Hockey League (1992–2017) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:21, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]