Hi, I noticed you removed numerous image requests. I noticed this for a couple of pages on my watchlist and the requests there seem reasonable to me. Please explain your reason of removals. --Altenmann>talk 18:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
@Altenmann: Thanks for allowing me to explain myself. Per Template:Image requested, the image requested template is "not a general-purpose "no image present" indicator ... Editors placing this template on a talk page should provide information about what images or photographs are wanted". Apparently in 2014, a user added these requests to around 50,000 talk pages, to the talk pages of (apparently) every single Iranian village article that lacked an image (see this category as an example). So, while some of these requests can be viewed as valid (we don't always explain our reasons for adding the imagereq template to talk pages), your average user at least doesn't add them to thousands upon thousands of talk pages en masse using the same edit summary, disregarding the usage guidelines in the process. The massive number of image requests dilutes the template's importance (it isn't intended to be added en masse), and also goes against the usage guideline. Also according to those guidelines, Template:Improve images should be added instead as a ""no image present" indicator". Nythar (💬-🍀) 22:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the April 2026 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2025 coordinator election, incumbents Dhtwiki, GoldRomean, Miniapolis, and Mox Eden were reelected coordinators, and Wikieditor662 was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).
December 2025 Blitz: 16 of the 31 editors who signed up for the December 2025 Copy Editing Blitz edited 116,064 words in 47 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
January Drive: 35 of the 55 editors who signed up for the January Backlog Elimination Drive edited 498,397 words in 183 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
February Blitz: 19 of the 23 editors who signed up for the February Copy Editing Blitz edited 83,969 words in 43 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
March Drive: 28 of the 48 editors who signed up for the March Backlog Elimination Drive edited 210,064 words in 87 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
April Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 12 to 18 April. Barnstars will be awarded here.
Progress report: As of 09:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 81 copyediting requests since 1 January 2026. The backlog of articles needing copyediting stands at 1,794 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, GoldRomean, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wikieditor662.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
The second round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 28 April. As a reminder for contestants who just joined or are unaware of recent changes to our round-points system, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, an increase from 5 points in the previous year, as per a consensus at WT:CUP. Peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.
Round 2 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; nine scored over 500; and fourteen scored over 300. The top seven contestants had at least one featured article (two of them with two apiece). The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:
MCE89(submissions) with 1,333 points, mainly from good and featured articles about Australian people and geography
Bgsu98(submissions) with 1,149 points, mainly from good articles, featured articles, and featured lists about figure skating, along with many article reviews and two good topics
Olliefant(submissions) with 830 points, mainly from good and featured articles about television shows, episodes and media, along with nearly four dozen good and featured article reviews
The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 12 featured articles, 13 featured lists, 2 featured-topic articles, 106 good articles, 22 good-topic articles and more than 40 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 3 In the News articles, and they have conducted over 200 reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.
Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. 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) 14:49, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
Changes to user permissions made from Meta are now included in the local user permissions log (T6055).
The autoconfirmed user group will soon be modified such that the four-day account age requirement begins when an account makes its first edit (T418484).
Arbitration
The arbitration case SchroCat has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 15 April.
Per a recent motion, appeals of blocks from the conflict-of-interest VRT queue are, by default, appealed on-wiki through the normal unblock process. However, they may be heard by the Committee if COIVRTers disagree on the interpretation of the evidence or believe ArbCom would be better suited to hear the appeal. Administrators are also advised that loosening or lifting such blocks without the consent of someone with access to the queue or ArbCom can be grounds for desysopping.
Per a recent motion, restrictions issued directly by the Committee may now be enforced with blocks which work exactly like contentious topic blocks.
