This is Girth Summit's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Hello Girth Summit,

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 ☎

Hello, I saw you were involve in blocking FYE31. Since then, they have made two more sockpuppets that were also blocked, Canofsoup1 and DLCY89*. You can compare their edit histories to see the trend: broken English, an exclusive fixation on local elections in California, and an obsessive drive to remove gray colored bars from election infoboxes. They have now made a new account: Qpi361. They've only made a few edits so far, but it's clearly the same person; broken English, local elections in California, and removing gray colored bars from infoboxes. Please block then (and do an IP ban or something, if possible).BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Bbb23 got there before me. I'm not super-active at the moment, work is crazy, so any future reports would probably be better made at SPI than here - you can use WP:TWINKLE to make reports, it's pretty straightforward. Hope to be back on an even keel at work soon, and back in the SPI saddle... Girth Summit _(blether) 21:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Me too! --Bbb23 (talk) 00:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your detailed reply. I agree that inaction is the best course in the circumstances. I wish you every success with the career challenges/changes. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading about Roman history (especially Julius Caesar) and I was very intrigued by Marcus Brutus' character, but I am confused as to why he was mentioned as a coward in some places.

What do you think? Samman24 (talk) 19:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Girth Summit, I am reaching out to discuss the possibility of amending the terms of my topic ban, specifically regarding the timeline for appealing the ban. I would like to request a reduction in the appeal period from 12 months to 6 months.

Since my imposed topic ban, I have remained committed to contributing positively to Wikipedia. My intent has always been to contribute positively to wikipedia within the guidelines and policies that govern our community. I believe my editing history post-ban reflects a genuine effort to adhere to these principles and contribute valuable information to various subjects.

My original ban stemmed from an unintentional violation of wikipedia's meatpuppetry policy, which occurred during a collaboration with a former co-worker. This was not a deliberate attempt to manipulate or undermine Wikipedia's procedures but a misunderstanding of the collaboration boundaries within the platform's guidelines, Since then, I have taken steps to deepen my understanding of Wikipedia's policies and community standards to ensure that my contributions are constructive.

One area I am particularly interested in contributing to involves the concept of the Network State, coined by Balaji Srinivasan in his book and other governance-related articles. I believe that by engaging in such topics, I can offer valuable insights and content to Wikipedia, improving the coverage of emerging concepts in governance and digital communities.

Given my history of constructive contributions and my commitment to continuous learning and adherence to Wikipedia's policies, I'd like to respectfully request that you consider my appeal to reduce the waiting period for my topic ban appeal to 6 months. I am fully prepared to engage in further discussions or fulfill any requirements the community or you may deem necessary to facilitate this request.

Thank you for considering my request. Mr Vili talk 03:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mr Vili, sorry for the slow response, I've been very busy with real life things these past few weeks.

Now, for the benefit of any talk page watchers who stumble across this, and in the interests of keeping the record straight, your original block was because of the connection with an account that you were collaborating with, and which you assert belonged to a co-worker rather than yourself. You did then afterwards deliberately evade that block by making an actual sockpuppet account, so let's not pretend that your block record is purely a result of some innocent misunderstandings on your part.

Now, with regards to your request, I've taken a brief look at some of your recent editing, and I find some of it rather concerning. For example, I looked at Jamba (language model), which you authored. In my personal view, the article is written in a highly promotional manner, and would benefit from a great deal of pruning, or perhaps a complete rewrite. It's not just the tone though, it's the sourcing. The article contains this sentence: Jamba performs well across a number of key measurements including throughput and efficiency while outperforming or matching other state-of-the-art models in its class on a wide range of performance benchmarks while having significantly greater context limits enabling use-cases that require increased context. The assertions in the sentence are supported by two citations. One of them is a promotional piece on the website of the language model's creator - that is a primary, affiliated source, and it absolutely should not be used to support any assertion about the subject's efficacy. The other citation is to VentureBeat, which appears to be quite cagey in its language - I see no assertion there about the subject' efficacy that does not have hedging language in it such as 'According to AI21 Labs' or 'AI21 Labs also claims that...' and such like. In other words, we are asking our readers to take the word of the model's creator for assertions about how good it is - that simply is not how we write articles, and it does not give me a great deal of comfort when I'm considering whether you have really taken on board what our mission is here.

Diffing a bit further, I stumbled upon this deletion discussion, a highly respected and very experienced administrator and former arbitrator noted that you weren't just edit warring at the article, you were edit warring over content supported by some very dubious sources in an article that was covered by WP:BLP restrictions. That also gives me very little comfort.

I'm afraid that I do not think that it would be in anyone's interests, including your own, to allow an early appeal of your ban - I think that it would actually serve you better to have a longer period of time in which you can learn more about how to write neutral, factual content, and source it appropriately, before asking the community to consider rescinding your topic ban. Best, Girth Summit _(blether) 15:35, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Newly-registered editor has been going around restoring socks' edits, claiming to be reverting socks' edits.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.

Technical news

• The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Hello Girth Summit,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:J. K. Rowling on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]