Cannabis Ruderalis


Removal of review of book

Hey there. I do not mind the removal of the link (see here: [1]) but may I ask why the link was removed? I assumed that links to peoples book reviews indicated more notability to the subject (since if your books are getting looked at and talked about etc.) but if this is incorrect then I apologize and probably should stop doing so (whenever I come through such articles/essays/reviews I tend to add them to Wikipedia due to me thinking they make the article better... but again if that is not the case let me know). Kind regards.Calaka (talk) 09:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thank you for the info.Calaka (talk) 09:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver

WikiProject Vancouver
You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status.

- Dear FA Team member, we could use your help if you're available. Mkdwtalk 06:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2010 WikiCup Signups Reconfirmation!

To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from this list! By removing your name, you are not removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup.

It's worth noting the rules have changed, likely after you signed up. The changes made thus far are:

  • Mainspace and/or portal edits will not be awarded points at all.
  • Did you know? articles (which were worth 5 points last year) will now be worth 10 points.
  • Good articles (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
  • Valued pictures will be now awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
  • Featured lists (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
  • Featured portals (which were worth 25 points last year) will now be worth 35 points.
  • Featured articles (which were worth 50 points last year) will now be worth 100 points.
  • Featured topics (which were worth 10 points per article last year) will now be worth 15 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
  • Good topics (which were worth 5 points per article last year) will now be worth 10 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
  • In the news will still be awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.

If you have any final concerns about the WikiCup's rules and regulations, please ask them now, before the Cup begins to avoid last minute problems. You may come to the WikiCup's talk page, or any of the judge's user talk pages. We're looking forwards to a great 2010 WikiCup! On behalf of the WikiCup judges, iMatthew talk at 03:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MTV VMA controversy in a heading of the Taylor Swift article

Hello, Gary King. You seem to do good work here, but I objected to one of your recent edits on the Taylor Swift article and reverted it. Is there any valid reason you removed MTV VMA controversy out of the heading of the Fearless section? The controversy generated notable interest, and clearly made her even more famous, and should be presented in that section's title. Aside from that, readers are going to be looking for it, and presenting it in a heading's title makes it easier. A fan of hers or someone knowing which project she was working on at the time would automatically know where to look, but not people who have heard about her or the incident at random. This is no different than presenting Chris Brown's 2009 (and so far only) controversy in a heading combined with one of his albums. These sections are not just about their albums but also about their controversies.

If you tend to revert me on this matter, I will try to get other editors to weigh in on this so that we can better achieve consensus about it. Flyer22 (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

I noticed you uploaded a picture on call of duty 4 on wiki using a copyrighted picture do you think it is ok to take a photo of a game and claim it as yours I will be taking this futher expect to hear from me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.9.28.102 (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply