Hi Giants, just wondering whether it is considered bad form to have more than two FLCs on the go at a time. The top of the page says Nominators should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed, but it doesn't say anything about a third. My two current nominations have been open for four weeks and three weeks and have four and two supports respectively (I would have thought the earlier one might have been promoted by now, but maybe it's not quite there yet). Should I wait until one has been promoted before adding another? Thanks! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
YouTube Awards for TFL
Hi Giants. Thank you very much for submitting YouTube Awards at TFL and writing a blurb for it. I was planning on nominating the article myself in mid-October, so that it could be run on 14 February 2020. This will be the 15-year anniversary of YouTube and will also fall on a Friday, so I thought it might be an appropriate TFL for that date. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 15:50, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
- That sounds like a fine date. I'll pick another list for this day and you can feel free to post a nom at TFLS for this article. Giants2008 (Talk) 15:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Glitch at TFL submission
When I click link on step two of submission instructions, it adds the information on a redirect page instead of the proper page? The correct page seems to be TFL/Submissions, but the "Click here" button leads to TFL/submissions, with a small "s"; that page with small s is a redirect. I've copied my submission to the correct place and it looks like Yashthepunisher and Peacemaker had the same problem, they moved their submissions too. Here's a diff of peacemaker talking about the glitch in edit summary. Regards, TryKid (talk) 00:47, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- @TryKid: I somehow forgot to investigate this comment until a peek on my talk page just now reminded me. Sorry about that. I made this edit to the instructions, which appears to have fixed the problem. Thanks for bringing that up, as I'm sure it was an annoyance. Giants2008 (Talk) 12:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. 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 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 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 Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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. 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, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
WikiJournals: A proposal to become a new sister project
Given your involvement in this discussion back in 2018 your perspective on a potential sister project could be useful:
Please consider voting to comment/support/oppose on the proposal.
Since we are also aiming to ensure broad input, please feel free to let any others know that you think might be interested.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Doubleday myth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baseman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)