User talk:AryKun

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome to the drive![edit]

Welcome, welcome, welcome AryKun! I'm glad that you are joining the drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

CactiStaccingCrane (talk)18:39, 1 February 2024 UTC [refresh]via JWB and Geardona (talk to me?)

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter[edit]

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February 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. 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 Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 26[edit]

January and February 2024—Issue 026


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Alpine ibex by LittleJerry
Markham's storm petrel by FunkMonk, Jens Lallensack, and Therapyisgood
List of primates by PresN
List of birds of Alberta by grungaloo
Rice by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by RecycledPixels
Barley by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Bruxton
Chicken by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by DocZach
Cereal by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Bruxton
Ant mimicry by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by AryKun
Anopheles by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by AryKun
Mosquito by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by 20 upper
Cherry blossom by Reconrabbit, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Sei whale by 20 upper, reviewed by grungaloo
Megaherbivore by 20 upper, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Brown bear by 20 upper, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Indian rhinoceros by 20 upper, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Hypericum hircinum by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by grungaloo
Hypericum foliosum by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Hypericum grandifolium by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by Esculenta
Boquila by Etriusus, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Aptostichus barackobamai by Etriusus, reviewed by Esculenta
Crassispira incrassata by Etriusus, reviewed by 20 upper
Punctelia by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Chrysothrix chlorina by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Chrysothrix chlorina by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Ramalina peruviana by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Menemerus animatus by simongraham, reviewed by Esculenta
Afraflacilla braunsi by simongraham, reviewed by grungaloo
Nasutoceratops by FunkMonk, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Pseudastacus by Olmagon, reviewed by FunkMonk
Angustidontus by Super Dromaeosaurus and Ichthyovenator, reviewed by Amitchell125
Pruemopterus by Super Dromaeosaurus and Ichthyovenator, reviewed by Etriusus
Black-billed magpie by grungaloo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Black-capped chickadee by grungaloo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Horned sungem by Jens Lallensack, reviewed by grungaloo
Flaco (owl) by Rhododendrites, reviewed by Etriusus
Telonemia by Snotoleks, reviewed by Esculenta
"Pliosaurus" andrewsi by Amirani1746, reviewed by grungaloo
Beaver drop by Lightburst, reviewed by Chiswick Chap

Newly nominated content

Horned sungem by Jens Lallensack
Tufted jay by grungaloo
Nasutoceratops by FunkMonk
Maize by Chiswick Chap
Cattle by Chiswick Chap
Pig by Chiswick Chap
Domestic duck by Chiswick Chap
Eusociality by Chiswick Chap
Fish by Chiswick Chap
Barnacle by Chiswick Chap
Ochrophyte by Snotoleks
Parvilucifera by Snotoleks
Thalattoarchon by Amirani1746
Hydropunctaria amphibia by Esculenta
Melanohalea by Esculenta
Spot test (lichen) by Esculenta
Lecideaceae by Esculenta
Hypericum × inodorum by Fritzmann2002
Hypericum sect. Androsaemum by Fritzmann2002
Olga Hartman by Viriditas
Mixtotherium by PrimalMustelid
Enhydriodon by PrimalMustelid
Lentinus brumalis by Зэгс ус

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GAN[edit]

Hey Ary, notice you snagged a bunch of GANs today. I'm online the rest of the afternoon and if you are able, I'd love to knock the one out for Hypericum x inodorum. I can respond to comments quickly and get right to editing. I'm getting really close to a GT and am anxious to get over the finish line. Thanks! Fritzmann (message me) 19:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure, I'll do it in a couple of hours when I finish up some irl work. AryKun (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I[edit]

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

  • Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
  • Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
  • Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
  • Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
  • Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
  • Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
  • Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
  • Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
  • Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
  • Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
  • Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
  • Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
  • Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
  • Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
  • Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
  • Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
  • Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for White-winged tapaculo[edit]

On 28 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article White-winged tapaculo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Scytalopus krabbei is named after Niels Krabbe, who discovered seven other species in its genus? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/White-winged tapaculo. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, White-winged tapaculo), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Meratus blue flycatcher[edit]

On 30 March 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Meratus blue flycatcher, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that only six years after its 2016 discovery, the Meratus blue flycatcher (pictured) was found being sold in Indonesian songbird markets? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Meratus blue flycatcher. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Meratus blue flycatcher), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings[edit]

Hey, just dropping a quick note to let you no I have no hard feelings about the revert on the honey badger article. I won't argue, but I disagree about the significance of such things. Similar "In popular culture" references are added to articles all the time. They may not be "important," but they're interesting and add dimension to the main topic without detracting. I went to read the article about honey badgers because of the YouTube video, and I was very surprised that there was no mention of it in the article. So that's why I added it. No big deal, though. Win some, lose some and all that. :) Yesthatbruce (talk) 20:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In popular culture sections are discouraged by MOS precisely because they attract immense amounts of trivia that really isn't relevant at all to the topic. Articles are for notable information on a topic, not everything that's interesting. There's a dozen videos on YT about honey badgers with over 30 million views, and none of them are at all notable because YT is a platform where random videos of a tuna being cut in half get that many views. Trivia sections also do detract from articles; since there's no criteria for exclusion once you start adding non-notable stuff, they become those unmaintainable lists that drown out the actually useful parts of an article. AryKun (talk) 06:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Thanks for the explication; much appreciated. I'll heed going forward. Yesthatbruce (talk) 19:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AryKun, thanks for participating in the WikiCup. You submitted Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot Black Singles number ones of 1989/archive1 for FLCR points in the WikiCup a few weeks ago. I apologize for not letting you know earlier, but per Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, this review does not seem like it's long enough to be eligible for points. I know this may be disappointing, especially if you did conduct an in-depth review and found no issues, but this is done to prevent people from submitting cursory reviews.

In the future, if you don't find any issues in an FLC, it might be best to list how the list complies with the Wikipedia:Featured list criteria. Even if it's only a single paragraph, such a review would qualify for points. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Multiple Good Article Reviewer's Barnstar
Thank you for participating in the March 2024 GA backlog drive. Your commendable contributions (30 points total) helped reduce the backlog by more than 250 articles! Here's a token of our appreciation. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 April newsletter[edit]

We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.

Our current top scorers are as follows:

Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]