user talk:theleekycauldron

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

Sometimes messages slip through the cracks. Sorry about that! I keep this list to let me know what I still need to respond to – feel free to add your own name and message here if you're still looking for a response from me.

1. 05:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC) fill out your thing at WP:REFLECTIONS – HouseBlaster (talk • he/they)
2. 02:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC) ban houseblaster from my talk page for messing with the inbox format theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
3. 06:14, 26 January 2026 (UTC) amber
4. 19:13, 7 August 2026 (UTC) refract
5. 19:13, 7 August 2026 (UTC) User talk:Theleekycauldron/Scripts/PSHAW#Bug relating to image template parameters

	Greetings, Theleekycauldron. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Wcquidditch
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

On 30 August 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Beverly Hills six-way intersection, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Beverly Hills six-way intersection (pictured) sees few crashes, despite having no roundabout, no traffic lights, no yield signs, and no lane markings? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Beverly Hills six-way intersection. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Beverly Hills six-way intersection), 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 nominate it.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The fourth round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 29 August at 23:59 (UTC). Everyone who competed in round 4 will advance to round 5 unless they have withdrawn or been removed. Round 4 was competitive, though slightly less so than round 3. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; six scored over 500; and nine scored over 300. Each of the top five competitors had hundreds of points accumulated from multiple GAs. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,318 points, mostly from 13 good articles and 3 featured articles about creeks and Chinese and Japanese subjects
• Vanderwaalforces (submissions) with 1,208 points from 2 featured articles, 2 featured lists, and 12 good articles about African leaders, along with over two dozen reviews
• A.Cython (submissions) with 1,084 points from 16 good articles and a small good topic about warfare and Greek elections, along with over two dozen reviews
• Vestrian24Bio (submissions) with 955 points, mostly from 2 FLs, 2 featured topics, and 16 GAs about cricket, and almost two dozen reviews
• Bgsu98 (submissions) with 837 points from 4 FLs and 8 GAs about figure skating, along with two dozen reviews

The full scores for round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 10 featured articles, 11 featured lists, 8 featured-topic articles, 103 good articles, 6 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 11 In the News articles, and they have conducted 170 peer reviews, FA and GA reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.

Remember that any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. 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) 02:43, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

	Greetings, Theleekycauldron. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: 45dogs
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 21:01, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

1. I see Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop has been stuck for a while at GARC. I'm considering adding Lauren Bennett there as recent events have left me wanting to stick to GAs I can review in a day and there's one there. Would you be interested in reviewing her?
2. Wasn't going to ask, but as I'm here anyway... Any idea why Shō Toku was not added to yesterday's DYKSTATS, given that it doesn't seem to have been pulled?--Launchballer 18:24, 31 August 2026 (UTC)Reply