User talk:SpeedReader/Archive 1

Hadger 03:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:10, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 23:39, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Jakob 16:20, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

06:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Jakob 16:21, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

11:34, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Jakob 16:22, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

--Astros4477 (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! The only problem is, I've used up all my ornaments on the other trees!   Jakob 15:52, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low   to High  , while for quality the scale goes from Low   to High  .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:30, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey SpeedReader! Wishing you a very happy New Year :) CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 09:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Just in case... The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 17:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The article was created because musician has release an album and Wikipedia is a great source to find out more information. I have added the list of songs with references to the Copyright Encyclopedia for verification. Please re-review the article. Thanks and Happy New Year! Here is the link to the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mike_Glowacki AnnamarieAnnamarie Blaha (talk) 16:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for creating this script! A couple of questions. First, shouldn't anyone appearing in the "Running Total" list below the leaderboard automatically be included? Also, the script seems to have a bug. I haven't counted anyone else's, but I've reviewed 31 articles, not 21. The script changed the number on the leaderboard. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 22:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Darn it, i didn't expect people to find my tampering with the scoring in my favor so quickly! ;). It seems i forgot to tell the script that capital letters don't matter (AFCH != afch unless you explicitly state it is.). The reviews it missed are now correctly being counted.

On the other hand, it is now assuming you have 40 reviews since it counts both the actual article and the redirect page that was created by moving the page. I'll iron that issue out in a bit. Hopefully the script will be quite stable in a couple of days. Oh, and thanks for mentioning the issue - much appreciated! Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 23:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Why am I not on the leader board? at the time that the script ran, I had 40 reviews. Thanks, Jakob 23:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC) P.S. Thanks for relieving me with the script! Before, I was the one who had to manually update the leaderboard  

It seems that you aren't using the AFC helper script to review pages. AFCBuddy detects pages by the default summary's it places when accepting or moving a page. There are a few possible solutions i can think off:

• If you could review pages using the AFC helper script it would detect edits as normal (Any reason why you are not using it?). Since updating the review list is manual copy-n-paste work i could leave any old reviews there. Equally i could adjust the review count of your username in the tool, so that it would offset the reviews it cannot detect itself.
• If you cannot or don't want to use the AFC Helper script for reviewing i can simply use your review list as a basis for the scoreboard (A simple count of the diffs on that page). A side effect would be that you would need to keep updating that page manually, since AFCBuddy wouldn't be able to detect any reviews from you :/ Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 23:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Alright, since I cannot use the AFC Helper Script, see this, and this for more on that, I'll add myself manually. Thanks! --Jakob 23:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Quite unfortunate you can't use it - it is quite a handy script for reviewing. To at least reduce your workload a little bit i added a little tweak to AFCHelper. When it tries to check your accounts edits it will use an alternative procedure that counts the amount of reviews listed at January 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive/SpeedReader. The result of count that (Currently 56 links, just as listed) will be used when generating the scoreboard. It won't prevent you from having to keep that page up to date manually, but at the very least you shouldn't have to worry about keeping the scoreboard up to date anymore   Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 01:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Just wondering...When a user manually puts an article under review, can the AFC Helper Script overwrite that? This is what seems to have happened here; I put the article under review (manually, of course) looked over it. Finding that it was not written in English, I went to decline it, but found that you already had. Please don't get me wrong, I don't really care that I didn't get the point; just wondering. --Jakob 20:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it can indeed do that. As long as a page has an open AFC template (With "Open" being "Not declined or accepted") it will simply override any "In review" templates and place the decline template. If a review is no longer open when someone tries to review a page, the script will report an error stating there are no open templates. Eg:

• (User1 loads page) => (User2 marks as Reviewing) => (User1 declines page) => Page Declined
• (User1 loads page) => (User2 declines page) => Page Declined => (User1 declines page, not having seen the new revision) => User1 receives an error.

The behavior is actually more or less as intended. If someone would mark the page as "Reviewing" they wouldn't be able to use the script to accept or decline a page afterwards if it wouldn't override in review templates. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear, SpeedReader.

I find your action to deny my submission absolutely preposterous. Please, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hyoryeong . They have submitted the same way, and they were able to submit their article and I cannot? Who sets the justice in Wikipedia? I find this unfair. There is a scarce amount of English information to quote from about Grand Prince Royal Jinan. If you guys want to raise the bar, then you guys need to start translating the works of Korean documents yourselves. Please, accept my article as many more of Korean Princes’ articles have been successfully submitted this way.

Lee, Jyong Chul.
Founder and CEO
The Korean Monarchy and the Korean Royal Armed Forces Korea Reunification Party
(22nd in line House of Grand Prince Royal Jinan)

Just a note: i got the same question from this user and replied to him here. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 02:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

On January 1st, you declined an article about Tommy Seigler I had written because I mistakenly submitted it blank, but I immediately resubmitted it with revisions, cited sources, and photos. Can you please take a look at the page again for me and see if it is ready for approval? Thank you.

Brandon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandonseigler (talk • contribs) 01:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low   to High  , while for quality the scale goes from Low   to High  .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Hii There..I would really like to know you a bit more..I mean lets get to know each other..I am from India and i am new to wikipedia..It would be great help to hear from you..Snehild Thank You..! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snehild (talk • contribs) 13:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low   to High  , while for quality the scale goes from Low   to High  .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Signups are now closed; we have our final 127 contestants for this year's competition. 64 contestants will make it to the next round at the end of February, but we're already seeing strong scoring compared to previous years.   Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) currently leads, with 358 points. At this stage in 2012, the leader (  Grapple X (submissions)) had 342 points, while in 2011, the leader had 228 points. We also have a large number of scorers when compared with this stage in previous years.   12george1 (submissions) was the first competitor to score this year, as he was last year, with a detailed good article review. Some other firsts:

•   12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score for an article, with the good article Hurricane Gordon (2000). Again, this is a repeat of last year!
•   Buggie111 (submissions) was the first to score for a did you know, with Marquis Flowers.
•   Spencer (submissions) was the first to score for an in the news, with 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede.
•   Status (submissions) was the first to score for a featured list, with list of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists.
•   Adam Cuerden (submissions) was the first to score for a featured picture, with File:Thure de Thulstrup - L. Prang and Co. - Battle of Gettysburg - Restoration by Adam Cuerden.jpg.

Featured articles, portals and topics, as well as good topics, are yet to feature in the competition.

This year, the bonus points system has been reworked, with bonus points on offer for old articles prepared for did you know, and "multiplier" points reworked to become more linear. For details, please see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There have been some teething problems as the bot has worked its way around the new system, but issues should mostly be ironed out- please report any problems to the WikiCup talk page. Here are some participants worthy of note with regards to the bonus points:

•   Ed! (submissions) was the first to score bonus points, with Portland-class cruiser, a good article.
•   Hawkeye7 (submissions) has the highest overall bonus points, as well as the highest scoring article, thanks to his work on Enrico Fermi, now a good article. The biography of such a significant figure to the history of science warrants nearly five times the normal score.
•   HueSatLum (submissions) claimed bonus points for René Vautier and Nicolas de Fer, articles that did not exist on the English Wikipedia at the start of the year; a first for the WikiCup. The articles were eligible for bonus points because of fact they were both covered on a number of other Wikipedias.

Also, a quick mention of   The C of E (submissions), who may well have already written the oddest article of the WikiCup this year: did you know that the Fucking mayor objected to Fucking Hell on the grounds that there was no Fucking brewery? The gauntlet has been thrown down; can anyone beat it?

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) 00:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)