16:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
307		Summit (talk)						Add sources
1,224		Lava (talk)						Add sources
126		Joule per mole (talk)						Add sources
14		Lava cone (talk)						Add sources
1,690		Pleistocene (talk)						Add sources
5,249		Mongolia (talk)						Add sources
6,760		North America (talk)						Cleanup
559		Symbol (chemistry) (talk)						Cleanup
33		Systems for Nuclear Auxiliary Power (talk)						Cleanup
559		Subduction (talk)						Expand
141		Volcanic crater (talk)						Expand
50		Geospatial metadata (talk)						Expand
34		President pro tempore of the Union of South American Nations (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
117		Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
2,089		Radioactive decay (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
39		Billion years (talk)						Merge
162		Submarine volcano (talk)						Merge
32		Subglacial volcano (talk)						Merge
74		Pichincha Volcano (talk)						Wikify
758		Enthalpy of vaporization (talk)						Wikify
118		Stawamus Chief (talk)						Wikify
2		Anthony Freston (talk)						Orphan
8		2015 Manipur ambush (talk)						Orphan
2		Armenian Ambassador to China (talk)						Orphan
4		Sleet Cone (talk)						Stub
4		Desolation Lava Field (talk)						Stub
2		Mess Lake Cone (talk)						Stub
2		Walkout Creek Cone (talk)						Stub
8		Penguin Island (South Shetland Islands) (talk)						Stub
20		Galán (talk)						Stub

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. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article El Laco you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 07:02, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cerro Cañapa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fault (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

20:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

The article El Laco you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:El Laco for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 10:01, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another good volcano article, Jo-Jo Eumerus. I just have a few questions:

1) In the second paragraph in the section Incapillo#Local, you use the word "shallow" as a verb:

• At the latitude of Incapillo, the Nazca plate subducting beneath the South America plate abruptly shallows towards the south.

This is followed by the gerund form (-ing form used as a noun), "shallowing". I could guess what the verb means, but I think a reader shouldn't have to guess. Can you link this to another article or section of an article so a reader can read more to understand the term?

2) In the third paragraph in the Incapillo#History section, you have several ranges. When you use "from", I'm pretty sure it should be followed by "to": from X to Y. If you don't want to use those two words, then you can use an en-dash, but I believe it should be without "from". Let me know which you prefer and I can change it. Jonesey95 Would you use an en-dash in a number range following the word "from", or would you use only either "from X to Y" or just "X–"Y (without "from")? I read MOS regarding number formatting carefully and could only find discussion of from...to regarding date ranges.

 – Corinne (talk) 04:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "from" and "to", I just looked at the History section, and it looks great. I'm a big fan of the {{convert}} template, which is used heavily in this section. It uses the "X to Y" phrasing nicely. The MOS advice on ranges is scattered throughout WP:MOSNUM, but this section is most relevant to this discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Corinne: "Shallow" in this case means "becomes less steep", "becomes more shallow". Would that be a better formulation? As for "from"-"to" in ranges, I generally use the convert template - not sure what the stylistically preferred method here is.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:16, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, Jo-Jo Eumerus. I'm just thinking of an average reader here. For ease of discussion, I'm going to copy the sentence where "shallow" is used:

• At the latitude of Incapillo, the Nazca plate subducting beneath the South America plate abruptly shallows towards the south.

If "shallow" (as a verb) is not something discussed in another geology article, then perhaps it would be all right to define it right here:

• At the latitude of Incapillo, the Nazca plate subducting beneath the South America plate abruptly shallows – becomes less steep – towards the south.

Another alternative would be to be slightly more precise and say that the angle of the Nazca plate as it subducts (or is subducting) beneath the South American plate becomes abruptly shallower towards the south:

• At the latitude of Incapillo, the angle of the Nazca plate as it subducts beneath the South American plate becomes abruptly shallower towards the south.

or:

• At the latitude of Incapillo, the angle of subduction of the Nazca plate as it moves below the South American plate becomes abruptly shallower towards the south.

 – Corinne (talk) 19:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Corinne: The angle version is probably the best.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:15, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O.K., but there are two versions with the word "angle" in them. Which do you prefer?  – Corinne (talk) 03:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{replyto|Corinne}} Second one is probably better.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of El Laco at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article El Laco, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the El Laco volcano in Chile has erupted enigmatic iron-rich lava flows? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/El Laco. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, El Laco), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

— Maile (talk) 12:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jo-Jo Eumerus. You have new messages at OGfromtheGut's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

19:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

On 21 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jotabeche, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that there is a shrine on Jotabeche, a volcano last active about five million years ago? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jotabeche. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jotabeche), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Incapillo you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 07:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Incapillo you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Incapillo for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 10:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jom-Bolok volcanic field, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that one eruption in the Jom-Bolok volcanic field created a 70 kilometre- (43 mile-) long lava flow? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jom-Bolok volcanic field. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jom-Bolok volcanic field), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check what was the intended end of the sentence

... and it propagated by a process named sheet inflation where

There is nothing after the word 'where' ! Shenme (talk) 02:09, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Shenme: Expanded the sentence a little.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:49, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kari-Kari (caldera), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Bolivian city of Potosí is located close to, or even inside, the Miocene Kari-Kari caldera? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kari-Kari (caldera). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kari-Kari (caldera)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kimsachata (Canchis), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kimsachata (Canchis). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kimsachata (Canchis)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on receiving approval for the DYK for Incapillo, Jo-Jo Eumerus. I spotted a typo in it, but I thought it would be better if you fixed it. It says "sill" where I believe it should be "still".  – Corinne (talk) 20:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Corinne: Fixed, thanks! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Taryatu-Chulutu at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Borsoka (talk) 04:23, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There seems incredibly strong support on the optional poll that you should be an administrator. If you are up for it, I can start the nomination form. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ritchie333: You can do so, but you may want to make an in-depth review beforehand. RfAs often fail because of some overlooked detail.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:31, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a pretty thorough look over the last couple of hundred contributions (both live and deleted). Things that made me stop, but were okay include File:Cosmic Bat.jpg which was deleted, but only because you requested it be moved to Commons, only 53 AfDs (though I think that's enough to clearly show you understand deletion policy), KNEEMO Initial Training Network (you correctly tagged this for G12, reverted the tagger per policy, an admin deleted it and it was recreated), but otherwise you seem to pass User:Kudpung/RfA criteria. The one concern I have is, exactly how well do you know copyright rules? Can you point to an FFD discussion or something where people disagreed with you but you stood your ground and it turns out you were right? I see you had a disagreement with Stefan2 about file tags not too long ago, what was that all about? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:42, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The main strength I have in terms of copyright is to know how to spot files with iffy copyright status (see recent CSD and FFD nominations, also Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 29, and file deletion nominations on Commons, but I doubt they'd matter much in an enwiki RfA...) as well as well as spotting files that don't reach the Threshold of originality (e.g Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 January 24, Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2015 December 19, Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 January 27, Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 10 and Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 January 29). In non-file terms I also work in WP:SCV - when the bot is on, that is, which it recently hasn't been. For the more basic stuff, I am familiar with what makes images non-free or free and what the former kind of images typically requires to stay on, hence I answer queries on WP:MCQ and the former WP:NFCC. I'll admit though that I don't know about every little detail of copyright law, hence the use of "some" on the WP:ORCP page.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:52, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I have put together a draft RfA at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jo-Jo Eumerus. As you probably know, you'll need to answer the three stock questions presented there. Questions 1 and 2 should be fairly straightforward, for Question 3 I found being honest without going into details was the best answer (indeed, anyone who writes "I haven't had any conflicts" automatically makes me think of opposing). I personally would like a co-nominator to sign off on this, so that the voting public can judge your suitability from two independent views. MelanieN (who passed RfA with about 97% support) has said she's happy to put something together. Once we have everything in place, and all the statements and answers have been double-checked, I will transclude it, at which point the RfA will become advertised to everyone.

The other advice I can give you now for RfA is once it is live, you only need to check it about once a day for questions, and I think a 24-hour turnaround on those is acceptable. I typed up my answers in batches every day, and then read the question and answer aloud to my other half, made a few changes, and then posted them. You will get questions on copyright, and be expected to answer them accurately, or perhaps to say "I don't know, it depends / expert opinions differ". Don't look at the voting sections, if an oppose vote is duff, there will be plenty of people supplying counter-arguments without you needing to lift a finger. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]