Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Hello, I have updated the pages of Draft:Global Alliance for Mass Entrepreneurship to more sources as per your suggestion and guidelines and would request to review it.I have added multiple secondary independent sources and also tailored the language to neutral point of view.Thank you.

@WikiDamedit: Sorry, I don't see any claim of notability, and the sources still do not meet the strict requirements of WP:NCORP. Lopifalko (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello, I have now added multiple secondary sources as per your suggestion and also independent ones. WikiDamedit (talk) 20:12, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiDamedit: Blogspot and crunchbase are not WP:RS; announcements do not count toward notability; and you have done nothing to explain why the company is notable. The article must meet the strict requirements of WP:NCORP. Lopifalko (talk) 20:30, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lopifalko! Can you help me to review the Draft:Judika article that I wrote? I see that you are a part of WikiProject Articles for creation and WikiProject Biography. Thank you. Fadly kurniadi (talk) 05:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fadly kurniadi: Hello. The article is too long and detailed, and does not use a neutral encyclopedic tone. For example, this from the Personal life section: "he marries the love of his life on his own 35th birthday ... Ever since then, Judika and Duma Riris' house hold, always looks harmonious and far from bad news. They are blessed with two children..." It also needs to be copyedited to improve the English language, for example: "reached popularity in the whole of among the public in Indonesia". Lopifalko (talk) 07:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I wrote the article for Apsley House (Swindon) which you have flagged for removal; thanks for you help with this, but I don't feel that it should be removed because, in addition to its listing, it is prominent locally as one of the landmark buildings in the town and as the historic home of the local museum. I have added a link to the book "Swindon in 50 buildings" which includes it. LucianHenderson (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LucianHenderson: Hi. I didn't flag it for removal, I flagged it to point out it may not be notable and so notability should be sought out by those that care to. My understanding is that along the lines of Wikipedia:Notability (architecture), buildings need to be "on the upper scale of a historic register. e.g., Grade II*" in order to be notable enough for inclusion. Alternatively, in order to satisfy WP:GNG, then they would need multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject in order to demonstrate notability. When I looked at the article it didn't appear to have that. -Lopifalko (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. LucianHenderson (talk) 16:20, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-Marilyn Stafford published several books and would had been considered a writer. Thank You-RFD (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RFD: Hi. Marilyn Stafford published several books of photography, so would be considered a photographer. You have to look at the prose in the article for the word "writer", which in this case is not there, because category:writer is reserved for when a person has made a notable impact as a writer specifically. A photo-book might not necessarily contain any writing at all. Stafford wrote introductions to some sections in at least 2 of her works, but that does not make her a writer. -Lopifalko (talk) 09:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You-RFD (talk) 12:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted to start a conversation about the third party tag you placed into the Kerry Tremain article. If you could be specific as to what section you feel warented the tag, I will take it out or look for better references. Jake-jakubowski (talk) 20:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake-jakubowski: Hi. It applies to the totality of sources in the article. I tried to review this article but just couldn't quite accept it because it doesn't have enough obvious notability. In terms of its sources that means that I think it has just 1 independent reliable source with significant coverage of the subject (sfgate). All other sources (from memory) are too closely associated / primary sources, such as an awrding body itself, or the publication itself. -Lopifalko (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. I'll see what I can do to get better sources and/or re-write. Jake-jakubowski (talk) 20:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lopifalko I updated the article with more and better sources for references, if you wouldn't mind re-assessing? Please and thank you. I will understand if you delete the last section about personal life due to the lack of a better source. Jake-jakubowski (talk) 07:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake-jakubowski: Thanks. Are you able to list here at least 2 independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject please? -Lopifalko (talk) 07:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lopifalko Not sure if this is how you meant, but here are few news ones I have included.

• Hebert, H. Josef (May 7, 1979). "Anti-Nuclear Rally Fires Up an Issue for 1980 Election". Fort Lauderdale News. p. 3. Retrieved January 11, 2023 – via newspapers.com.

I can't access this in order to see if it satisfies the criteria. article has a photo of the no nuke banner that Tremain designed, which is established in a different ref

• Gourevitch, Rebecca (2020). Encountering the Records of the Mother Jones International Fund for Documentary Photography (Masters). University of Rochester. Retrieved January 11, 2023.

Being a single person's work rather than coming from a source with a number of editorial staff, Gourevitch's essay for her MA is not a good source. undertood

• Hamlin, Jesse (December 17, 2006). "Not Strictly Academic / New look, focus for Berkeley's alumni magazine". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 11, 2023.

This is OK. Thank you

• Fost, Dan (December 12, 2001). "Magazine helps topple Presidio Trust chief". SFGATE. Retrieved December 26, 2022.

This is just a small mention, not significant coverage of Tremain. A small mention yes, but it establishes that Tremain wrote the article in which they are referring to.

• Eliminating Barriers to Chronic Care Management in Medcare". United States House Committee on Ways and Means. February 25, 2003. Retrieved January 4, 2023. This is a transcript from a congressional hearing mentioning Tremain as a contributor

Be that as it may, those source may satisfy specific facts in the article, but what I'm asking for is at least 2 independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. These are the underpinnings of WP:GNG that will ascertain whether the subject is notable enough, unless the subject satisfies any subject-specific notability criteria e.g. WP:ARTIST (and this is where museum collections and awards come into it). -Lopifalko (talk) 08:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lopifalko Hamlin, Jesse (December 17, 2006). "Not Strictly Academic / New look, focus for Berkeley's alumni magazine". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved January 11, 2023. This article mentions him in depth. and references his time with California Magazine and the article about the Presidio National Park, I added it to the Wikipedia article. I'm hoping that this one plus the one mentioned above will qualify.

@Jake-jakubowski: (There's no need to tag me in your messages, as these are on my talk page I get notified regardless.) WP:GNG requires that the subject has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" and that "multiple sources are generally expected". WP:ARTIST requires that "the person's work (or works) has: ... (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, ... or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." So far by my reckoning we have only 1 such WP:IRS source; a potentially notable exhibition venue but only a group exhibition whose source does not mention Tremain; and 1 museum collection. By my reading, the awards are not notable or are for a publication rather than for Tremain. Note that, it is allowable to have a larger number of sources than above that each do not contain WP:SIGCOV in order to demonstrate notability, but they would still need to contain more than the sources I've seen. Perhaps more facts can be found in the article as it stands, that I am not yet seeing, that would amount to satisfying the notability criteria.And what it does contain does begin to add up to something. However it does not yet appear to me to add up to what is required. Can more be found, or can you see what the criteria above requires and show me that this is indeed met? -Lopifalko (talk) 15:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the tagging. I will get back to you within 24hrs with an answer to your question. Thank you and I genuinely appreciate the open communication. Jake-jakubowski (talk) 15:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made a new sandbox of the article with notes in red. I hope this helps. After a review, if it looks like it still doesn't qualify, maybe we could move it to a draft space. Jake-jakubowski (talk) 22:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jake-jakubowski: I think my point still stands that I was asking you to respond to: Wikipedia:Multiple sources, so I have put the article back in the review queue. -Lopifalko (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to start a discussion regarding Dr. Bhushan Kathuria. First of all, thanks for reviewing the page. You have placed Peacock tag on it, can you please highlight that content which is inappropriate. Thanks IvivekChoudhary (talk) 13:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@IVickyChoudhary: Promotional in tone or content: "strong track record of success"; "He has helped make treatment available to everyone, including those who can't afford it."; "prestigious"; "relentless". -Lopifalko (talk) 13:16, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some changes, have a look and update please. IvivekChoudhary (talk) 13:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removed above promotional words, kindly check and remove the tag. IvivekChoudhary (talk) 14:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain more abbout the new like a resume tag ? IvivekChoudhary (talk) 18:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some more changes, kindly recheck and give proper guidance. IvivekChoudhary (talk) 11:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I made some alterations that make the lead seem less like a CV. -Lopifalko (talk) 11:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for you help and guidance. IvivekChoudhary (talk) 11:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete. Hope you don't mind me springing up on your Talk page! I've drafted my first article here: Draft:Leon Emirali. Long story short... I saw this chap giving a TV interview outside the Houses of Parliament some time last year, snapped a photo, did some research and realised he didn't have a Wiki page so I took on the project as my first creation! From what I've found, he's done numerous jobs; notably as an adviser to former Prime Minister Theresa May and current Health Secretary Steve Barclay. He also writes political commentary for The Times and others, and it looks like he does a fair bit of broadcast political commentary too with BBC News and others. He also stood for election (unsuccessfully!) a couple of times and has a career in business.

My first attempt got rejected. I think it was because the Reviewer was from the USA and didn't quite grasp the validity of some of the publications used in citations. I then asked a UK-based new page reviewer and member of the notability WikiProject (Paul W) to help me improve the article - which he very helpful did and reckons the page is 'borderline notable' and that the sources I've used are valid, but he didn't want to approve or reject the article himself as it'd be "marking his own homework". Fair enough.

My fear is that in the AfC queue, it might fall to another US-based Reviewer and therefore face similar issues to before (e.g the reviewer maybe not having an inherent understanding of the UK political landscape etc, understandably of course - I wouldn't know where to start with a US political adviser/commentator!). Given you've worked on a number of articles on UK-based living persons, I wonder if you'd do the honours of taking a look?

I'm not particularly wedded to this article. If you think it meets criteria, then I'd naturally be over the moon with my first creation - but similarly, if you think it's not quite there then I'll most likely bin this project and search for a new subject in my pursuit of that elusive first page creation!

Anyway, I'll leave the request with you and would be grateful if I can borrow your UK perspective in the hope my article gets a fair hearing.

Thanks for considering,

JF.

JoinFluffy250 (talk) 17:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoinFluffy250: Hi. People who meet the basic criteria are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources, that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject. Can your provide 3 such sources please? and I will look at them.

People who do not meet the basic criteria may still be considered notable by meeting the additional criteria. These additional criteria are that "the any biography|person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times; or the person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field; or the person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary"; or other subject-specific criteria that exist for academics; creative professionals; crime victims and perpetrators; entertainers; politicians and judges; and sports personalities (you can read about each of their criteria up at those links). Does any of this relate to your subject? However, "Articles may still not be created for such people if they fall under exclusionary criteria, such as being notable only for a single event, or such as those listed in Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not." -Lopifalko (talk) 10:08, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lopifalko. Sorry for the delayed reply - I've been away. Sure - 3 x news items covering the subject can be found here. There are others in the article draft as well.

Thanks very much,

JF

P.S. I've sought assurance from a Wiki Patroller (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paul_W) that PR Week is a respectable and independent publication, as this was queried previously.

i News (national UK newspaper) writing about the subject's comments made about ex-UK Prime Minister: https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/need-make-literal-theresa-may-bot-digital-wars-tory-pr-wonk-says-118428

The Comet (regional UK newspaper) writing about a pledge the subject made whilst standing as a political candidate: https://www.thecomet.net/news/22364428.hitchin-candidates-allowance-donation-pledge-stirs-debate/

PR Week (trade magazine for PR industry) writing about subject's inclusion in '30 under 30' list:https://www.prweek.com/article/1439601/prweek-uk-30-30-2017-leon-emirali-crest JoinFluffy250 (talk) 09:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JoinFluffy250: WP:SIGCOV states that ""Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM. Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton, that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band." Your i News source is about the subject, only has as far as I see "Leon Emirali, writing for Conservative Home, is apparently unperturbed by the association, calling for the creation of a WhatsApp chat bot to give a “bitesize, conversational overview” on key issues.", plus some quotes, which is not significant coverage to my understadning. The Comet "is a weekly newspaper covering the English towns of Stevenage, Hitchin, Letchworth and Baldock, as well as the surrounding villages in north Hertfordshire and south-east Bedfordshire." and so is not a great source. The PRWeek source would appear to fit the bill (but it is paywalled so I have not read). This is not to satisfy WP:NBIO. -Lopifalko (talk) 13:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback @Lopifalko - really helpful. Can I politely push back on your assessment of the mention in the i News piece being trivial? I would argue it isn't a trivial mention of the subject because the headline of the article references the subject and the entire premise of the article the journalist has written is sparked by the subject's comments - 'Tories need a literal Theresa May bot to improve digital image, says Conservative PR wonk'. In this case, Emirali is the "PR wonk".

I take your point the The Comet. Here's some additional third-party sources I encountered when researching the subject. Please let me know if you feel these suffice.

Thanks,

JF

Spear's Magazine (a magazine for HNWIs) - a profile piece on the subject

https://www.spears500.com/adviser/5395/leon-emirali

PR Week (an additional article to the one you've already seen) - carrying news that the subject has launched a new business

https://www.prweek.com/article/1751397/ex-government-media-aide-leon-emirali-launches-comms-consultancy?utm_source=website&utm_medium=social

Provoke Media (a trade magazine for the communications industry) - carrying news of the subject's appointment

https://www.provokemedia.com/latest/article/plmr-strengthens-public-affairs-advisory-bench-with-two-hires JoinFluffy250 (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your creation of Open Eye Gallery and list of notable photographers showing there. Jamesmcardle^(talk) 21:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jamesmcardle: Thank you James. At the time I wrote it it surprised me that I knew so little about it. And I've still not paid a visit, but intend to as it's nice to see these things in the flesh after having focused on them intently for the article. (In that regard, I visited Le Bal recently.) -Lopifalko (talk) 21:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have added some new information onto the Wikipedia page for Provoke Magazine. Seeing as you have in the past edited this page, and that you are proficient in photography subjects, I would like to ask if you could take a look at my edits and provide me with some feedback. Thank you! Andrew34jack (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrew34jack: Hi, I've been following the discussion on the talk page there and figure that you already have ample and exemplary feedback from the esteemed Hoary. What more do you need. -Lopifalko (talk) 16:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Erm ... esteemable feedback from the exemplary Lopifalko, perhaps? -- Hoary (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Just wondering with your removal of this page due to notability. Is that correct? It is noted as a highly influential record for 80s hip hop and electro. There are many online sources that talk of this, eg - https://www.allmusic.com/album/b-2-unit-mw0000376583 https://thevinylfactory.com/features/the-many-faces-of-ryuichi-sakamoto-an-introduction/ https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/apr/02/ryuichi-sakamoto-the-avant-gardist-who-became-a-groundbreaking-pop-star https://au.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/ryuichi-sakamoto-yellow-magic-orchestra-oscar-winning-composer-dead-obituary-46331/

I think it certainly meets this criteria: The recording has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it. Wurlz (talk) 01:51, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wurlz: Hi, I converted it to a redirect because "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article". Please, by all means, switch it back to its own article if there is some content that you can add to it beyond that. I agree that it sounds as though that would be a valid article. If I can be of assistance with that please let me know. -Lopifalko (talk) 05:49, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lopifalko! Can you help me to review the Draft:NetReputation article that I wrote? I see that you are a part of WikiProject Articles for creation. Thank you. Just for clarification: we met a week ago on Draft_talk:NetReputationParanoya23 (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete, Before I commit another Wiki Faux Pas, I was thinking of creating an article on the degree South Collective, given the photographers involved in that, their book "War", and the international exhibition that accompanied the book. There are now I think, Wiki articles extant on all but one of the contributors. I dont want to do this though with the chance it will go through the rejection process. Thoughts please. DJB of Melb (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DJB of Melb: Hi. Does coverage of the collective itself live up to the requirements of WP:GNG, that it has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" and that "multiple sources are generally expected"? Was the exhibition dedicated to the collective and held in any notable institutions (e.g. those with a Wikipedia article)? -Lopifalko (talk) 13:03, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to do a better job of making edits that are useful. Would love your advice. I noticed that you removed an addition I made to the examples on thrust stage. Your edit summary indicated that you removed examples that did not have a page of their own. My addition, while an important theatre at a major national university, does not have its own wiki page so it was removed. I did make sure to include references and notations to verify that it was accurately identified as an example of thrust stage. To improve my future edits (and reduce how much admin time I waste), is this a universal expectation for such lists of examples? Should examples listed on any page only be those examples that have their own separate page?

thanks for your help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thrust_stage&diff=1150987633&oldid=1145674579&variant=en Duraleigh (talk) 12:51, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Duraleigh: Hi. Please see Wikipedia:External links, including its WP:ELLIST. See also WP:CSC. Come back if you have any more questions. -Lopifalko (talk) 05:06, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kayed Afifi, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kayed Afifi, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Mirrorless cameras indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:44, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re your edit on Ilana Panich-Linsman‎: In an edit you took out a list of her major projects, stating that bibliographies are for books; but Wikipedia guideline states: "Bibliographies may also be a listing of of published works ." @Wikipedia:WikiProject Bibliographies. I believe we should put her works back, and have reverted your deletion. I think your deliniation of what should be in a bibliography is too limited and beyond Wiki guidelines. Mwinog2777 talk) 16:12, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lopifalko,

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.

Hi - redirect got removed with change of caps, manually placing hyperlink BrightsForever (talk) 06:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BrightsForever: Hi. I intentionally moved without leaving a redirect. Please see:

• WP:PMVRC - "7. Moving pages from a title that is an implausible typo or misnomer, only when the page is a recent creation (WP:CSD#R3)"
• WP:R3 - "R3. Recently created, implausible typos. This applies to recently created redirects from implausible typos or misnomers."
• WP:TITLE - "Note that the exact capitalization of the article's title does not affect Wikipedia search, so it is not necessary to create redirects from alternative capitalizations unless these are likely to be used in links; see Naming conventions (capitalization)." -Lopifalko (talk) 07:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lopifalko,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Lopifalko,

I was commissioned to create Louise Abbott's recent website, and have got a lot of written content from her CV and the website. This information shows that the Wiki page has old, outdated information and in one or two instances it is incorrect. It would be great if I could update the Wikipedia page in question: Louise Abbott

Would you assist me with the editing of the page so it can be brought up-to-date? Musoquinz (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Musoquinz: Hi, we welcome your contributions. As an editor with a conflict of interest, please can you write on the article's talk page your suggested changes, in a clear format where each can be easily assessed and discussed if need be. Then unconnected editors can deal with relevant changes. All facts will require reliable sources, usually independent sources rather than coming from the subject, but in certain incontrovertible cases the subject is ok to use as a source. -Lopifalko (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lopifalko thank you for the clear directions, I will write clear content on the article's talk page the suggested changes, for unconnected editors to action these. Much appreciated! Musoquinz (talk) 15:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lopifalko. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cédrine Scheidig, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm not sure how often you work on album articles, but your two edits to The Ones Ahead are contrary to regular practice on album articles. First of all, we don't remove future dates from Template:Infobox album#released, even if they have not happened yet [1]. The same applies to all media with future release dates on Wikipedia (do you remove future release dates from film infoboxes, or TV infoboxes?) so I don't know what your reasoning for this was. If an album has a sourced release date, it's put in the released= parameter. There have been concerns about the phrasing of this parameter previously, but nothing has had consensus. In my opinion you should view it as "(to be) released" on that date. (By the way, It is now July 28 in some countries, so the concern is no longer valid.) Secondly, all critical reception sections for media group similar reviews. It is not standard to separate every review with a blank line between each [2]—critical reception is one topic. Please see the critical reception section for all articles in the music topic area and you will see what I mean (the Beatles' albums, e.g. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band#Contemporary critical reception, are good examples). Hell, even take look at film reception sections (Barbie (film)#Critical response, Oppenheimer (film)#Critical response for two recent examples). All decent critical reception sections absolutely do not separate each outlet's quote on a separate line. The quotes I chose are not in any way dissimilar to the grouped quotes in the examples. I've seen you edit in music topics before, so to see you make edits contrary to the regular way album articles are formatted has been really surprising. Ss112 11:27, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Hi. My reasoning was that Infobox album#released indicates past tense. I believes that at the time not anywhere on Earth was it the 28th; I did give that consideration. If an album hasn't been released yet then any release date is merely an intention to relase, is not reality until it has been released. I was annoyed that people would jump the gun and put a release date before it had happened. I admit that because I was driven by annoyance, I left the infobox parameter hanging with an error, thinking that someone else could sort that out, and it was wrong of me to do that. Thank you for your suggestion that "you should view it as "(to be) released" on that date".

I hear what you say that "critical reception sections for media group similar reviews". I was not aware of any existing best practice on this. I am aware of some best practice on music articles but have not read exhaustively. My reasoning was that as a block of text, it was made easier to read by splitting it into separate paragraphs. I regularly take this approach across an array of topics. I will take on board your suggestions, thank you. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:45, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making edits like this to infoboxes. There is currently no consensus that supports removing future dates from infoboxes. You're free to attempt to create such a consensus, but such a consensus certainly doesn't exist currently. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 12:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: Apologies. As I said to Ss112 above, "my reasoning was that Infobox album#released indicates past tense" and I stand corrected as to how people have groen to treat this. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:46, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Sergecross73 msg me 11:35, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heavy copyediting on Arturia MicroFreak. This was the first article I ever wrote and, to be honest, it really helps for someone else to help me see past the "rose-tinted spectacles" that affect my opinion of my early writing. I'm much better at understanding wiki-policy now, but it's a strange feeling to see how much my writing has changed, so thank you for that. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 16:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lopifalko. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cédrine Scheidig".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:03, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lopifalko,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page 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) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it! Good to encounter another Grauniad reader. KJP1 (talk) 07:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KJP1:  :) Sometimes it feels like a competition, in a good way. Thanks for helping, I thought 1933 seemed too young to die and I foolishly stuck to the source, despite the obvious. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now, are you going to watch this to see what his role was, or shall I, [3]? KJP1 (talk) 07:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, nice find, I have to get to work-work for the time being... -Lopifalko (talk) 07:18, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lopifalko,

Before you move an article and decide to NOT leave a redirect, please check "What links here" and make sure there are no redirects to the page you are moving. If there are, please leave a redirect so that these redirects can be corrected. There really isn't any reason not to leave a redirect and I'm not sure why page movers tend not to leave them when not leaving, for both articles and talk pages, often results in broken redirects that then need to be deleted. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:39, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: I'm really sorry. I tend not to pay attention to "What links here" for articles so new in the Page Curation queue, but will do so henceforth. I don't leave redirects when the article name seems like one that one that would not be expected to be required, so as to save creating redundant redirects, and because I believe I've read that I should do this in a guide somewhere. Again, I will bear what you say in mind in future. Thank you for your advice. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: I thought you were saying that I had actually broken a link, which is why I was so apologetic. But it doesn't appear to me that I did break any link. I think you're just saying that in your opinion you think a redirect should have been left. I didn't leave a redirect as it seems wasteful to leave them for wording that is unlikely to be used in future. I've looked but can't find the guide somewhere around here that says that it is ok to do this. Some/all users get a message with the name of the new article, so hopefully they page creator will see that. -Lopifalko (talk) 17:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Lucius Blake has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 15:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Please can you let me know precisely what you consider to have been a copyvio? -Lopifalko (talk) 15:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was some content that was a match for the article in The Guardian. Here is a link to the report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service. I removed some and I paraphrased some. — Diannaa (talk) 20:07, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You removed my update while I was editing, with a note that source is missing.

I was in the phase of adding the sources. You removed my updates before I finished HanochP (talk) 17:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HanochP: Hi. I'm sorry about that. I suggest you write your words and include an inline source in one go, so that your work does not appear to others like so many other contributions that have to be removed because they lack sources. -Lopifalko (talk) 17:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Other editors explained me that such approach might result loss of all the data, in case another editor edit in parallel to myself. HanochP (talk) 09:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Martine Gutierrez, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Мой Псевдоним (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Aes Dana (musician) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello. I would like to request your assistance because I need to know how to solve references' issues.

Мой Псевдоним (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Мой Псевдоним: Draft:Aes Dana (musician) was almost all sourced to the subject or to their label, which are primary sources. The orbmag source is an interview, so is again a primary source. The loopmasters source is again a primary source, and the claim that it supports is not a notable one. Imdb is not a valid source. That doesn't leave any sources at all that contribute to notability, where it needs multiple, independent, reliable sources, with WP:SIGCOV. Nor are there any facts that would allow for the article's inclusion under WP:NMUSIC. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Does Interview count as reliable source? Мой Псевдоним (talk) 19:08, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Мой Псевдоним: See Wikipedia:Interviews. Only for some very specific and uncontroversial / uncontestable facts. They do not count toward notability. -Lopifalko (talk) 19:19, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added some references. Hope it counts. Мой Псевдоним (talk) 23:08, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lopifalko Hello. I would like to know what are the next steps? I did my best, I was looking at many places for sources. It wasn't easy because most sources are interviews. Although I attached sources about his work with cinematic directors. Also, according to your attached template, I should find any sources from news,newspapers, books, scholar and JSTOR. I did that I even found ebook about ambient guide on french but somehow you deleted as source but I found it as template says. Мой Псевдоним (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Мой Псевдоним: OK let me have a think about where we might potentially find sources, when I get a bit of time, and explain exactly the bar that has to be met for notability, and explain why I removed what I did. Meanwhile might I suggest looking around at other associated artists to Aes Dana on Wikipedia and seeing if you can improve the articles on them as I found them to be very lacking in sources. -Lopifalko (talk) 09:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks for help. I will try again to find anything else. Мой Псевдоним (talk) 18:23, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Мой Псевдоним: The subject needs to meet WP:MUSICBIO in the first instance, and failing that either WP:NBASIC, WP:ANYBIO or WP:CREATIVE. I begin by searching the web for "Aes Dana review ALBUM NAME" and looking for reliable sources. I have thus found a few and added them. These are all at the same source (when multiple are required for notability): Igloo Magazine. Igloo appears to be what wold be considered reliable because it has a number of staff contributors. Can you find more? So far I see other sources with reviews of the subject's albums, such as Headphone Commute and Sputnik Music, but these are not considered reliable, the former because it is predominantly the work of one person, the latter because primarily its reviews are user submitted. You can find guidance on whether some sources are considered reliable or not at WP:RSP. I removed the "ebook about ambient guide" because of WP:RSSELF ("Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book and claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published sources are largely not acceptable. Never use self-published sources as independent sources about other living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer."). I do not yet see how the subject meets WP:MUSICBIO, but another review from a reliable source with WP:SIGCOV would get it over the line. I had to remove a chunk of your writing about film/TV music because what you added was a WP:COPYVIO of https://ultimae.com/artists/aes-dana/. Other text that you added earlier, before I altered it, was also a copyright violation from that same page. If you want to re-add this then you need to rewrite it in your own words. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Could tell me where exactly I need sources? Could you indicate that in my text? Мой Псевдоним (talk) 18:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book and claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published sources are largely not acceptable. Never use self-published sources as independent sources about other living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." — Ok, then I could've attached Aes Dana's website to support my words about his biography and also I might attach Solar Fields' words to make it more unbiased. Also I found information that Olivier Bernard, an author of that ebook, is musical critic who published his books here: 1. http://www.camionblanc.com/detail-livre-anthologie-de-l-ambient-d-eric-satie-a-moby-nappes-aeroports-et-paysages-sonores-497.php 2. http://musid.fr/author/musid/ 3. https://www.musicaelettronica.it/mireille-chamass-kyrou-la-pioniera-egiziana-della-musica-concreta/

4. https://catalogue.bm-lyon.fr/ark:/75584/pf0002220654?posInSet=2&queryId=N-EXPLORE-ce669791-7337-4032-be56-ab59cd176db5 . For now I have more questions than answers Мой Псевдоним (talk) 20:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Under the name Aes Dana, he produced 10 albums, a compilation of audio samples, and 50 tracks for different compilations. He has made music for short and feature films, documentaries and BBC TV programs such as "Atrophy Bank" by Sam Asaert, "The Passport" by Amund Lie, "Mandorla" by Roberto Miller." — additionally I put sources from directors mentionin Aes Dana as composer for those movies and also Aes Dana's words about his work with directors to make it more unbiased Мой Псевдоним (talk) 21:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added some sources, not sure if "isratrance" valid source, because i didn't find it on RSN. Also added source from Echoes radio, a review written by John Diliberto a very known person. At last, I put source from daily newspaper Times of Malta about his collaboration with Cygna. Мой Псевдоним (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Could you give me an answer, please? Мой Псевдоним (talk) 03:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lopifalko:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2100 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I recently created Draft:2023 AI Safety Summit due to the topic gaining significant media coverage and attention. This is the first article I've ever created on Wikipedia, and I saw you made some edits to it, so I was wondering if you'd be so kind as to review the article? I would like to have the article created as quickly as possible so it can be submitted to WP:ITN. Thanks! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PrecariousWorlds: Hi. I see that it has already been reviewed. Great! Personally, I would not have reviewed it because of WP:NOTNEWS. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the edits made to the draft for Northeastern Global News. However, I believe that one of the references you removed regarding the rebrand is imperative to the article as a source to show there was a rebrand. Please explain why you believe this source is superfluous. Straight.Up.Sean (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Straight.Up.Sean: Hi. I considered the source I removed to be superfluous because the sentence "Northeastern Global News, or NGN was founded as News @ Northeastern." was sourced to your source at "0". Did the source at "0" not support the claim it was cited against? If so then you're welcome to restore the source that does. -Lopifalko (talk)

Considering what you wrote at User_talk:Vanderwaalforces, "If this reference were readded, would it qualify?", the answer is no, because primary sources do not contribute toward notability, hence me removing them. Dead links are ok. And your argument about "If The Huntington News qualifies for notability..." is covered by this page: WP:WHATABOUTISM. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:14, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying the WHATABOUTISM. Can you further explain why ^[1] in particular was removed? I'm new to editing on Wikipedia, so I don't quite understand the terminology you used. Straight.Up.Sean (talk) 06:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have shortened the title of the Draft:Siege of Kraków Castle page. Please also shorten the page title of Action of the Tyniec Abbey. Kolya Muratov (talk) 10:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolya Muratov: Done. -Lopifalko (talk) 10:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kim Stringfellow, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "generic title" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:42, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I set up a page for Andy Saunders, author of Apollo Remastered and I noticed you had removed Author from the intro and page title. I just wanted to understand the process. He is an author as has has a published book and the article ref 1 refers to him as ‘author’. It’s very possible I’m amending incorrectly. Appreciate any advice or guidance. Thanks. JaymoA (talk) 14:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JaymoA: Hi. My reading of it is that he has published a book of restored photographs, which makes him a photo restorer, not an author/writer. Nothing in the prose of the article describes that he is known for being an author. 1 source out of 19 calling him an author is not enough to describe him as being notable for being an author. If the book involves a significant amount of writing by the subject then we can review this. -Lopifalko (talk)

@Lopifalko Thanks for coming back to me. The book is around 50-60k words, I think. Each photo (400 of them) has a 100-120 word story explaining the story of the image. Then there are separate written chapters on the history of space photography, development of cameras etc...

The problem is, most of the news stories focus on the image restoration, not the written element. How would I demonstrate that? Again, apreciate the help. JaymoA (talk) 16:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JaymoA: Ahh, ok, then I stand corrected. I hadn't seen that when I looked at summaries of the book. It might still be that he is notable as a restorer and not as an author though (Wikipedia tends to use the term writer). We have to go by what the sourcces say, as notability arises out of what the sources highlight. Please start by including in the prose a description of his written contribution, if you can do so with references. -Lopifalko (talk) 17:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Lopifalko, really appreciate the advice. I've added a bit more in to the book section with a reference to are article that talks about the chapters. Should I reference a specific part of the article, or is a general reference enough? Thanks again. JaymoA (talk) 17:46, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JaymoA: Good work. A general reference is enough, unless it's a book where you can refer to a page number, which this is not. Please read WP:NCPDAB: "An article title will require disambiguation if there are other articles to which the plain title could also refer ... The disambiguator is usually a noun indicating what the person is noted for being in their own right. Sometimes disambiguators need to be more specific. For example, "Engelbert Humperdinck (musician)" could still refer to two different people, so Engelbert Humperdinck (composer) and Engelbert Humperdinck (singer) are used. Or, failing a practical single qualifier, the disambiguator can be expanded with a second qualifier". As Andy Saunders "(film restorer)" or "(imaging specialist)" he would not be confused with another Wikipedia article on an Andy Saunders film restorer or imaging specialist, so I do not believe we need "author" or "writer" in the disambiguation. Also, film rstoriation is what he is known for and that also accomodates his writing on that topic, or eclipses any more general writing that he may have done. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Danielromeroprobstmcswain (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Fred Berner (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is my first article, and I’ve tried to conform to the guidelines for articles about living people. Can you help me understand what content should (or should not) be included so that this article can be approved? Danielromeroprobstmcswain (talk) 15:12, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danielromeroprobstmcswain: Hi. For starters, there are a lot of claims, but the majority of them are not sourced with inline citations. Make sure everything that you include has a corresponding source and I will be happy to look at it again. -Lopifalko (talk) 15:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit concerned that you promoted this article, not so much because of the multiple grammar and spelling errors and overlinking, but because the image clearly has an invalid attribution to the article editor, and therefore at least potentially is a copyright issue. Don't we normally sort out these things before promotion? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: What do you mean by that I "promoted " the article? -Lopifalko (talk) 14:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I'm accusing the wrong person, many apologies Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: No problem. -Lopifalko (talk) 14:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a "standardized collection format"? The list before was definitely not. I already gave a ref or is an online ref obligatory? - I hope you recognized that I am constantly working on it bit by bit. So if you had some restraint to let me work on it further, that would be nice. Nicer even would be if you, instead of simply reverting edits that are obviously in progress, could speak to me, make a suggestion and eg give me the link for this standard. And if there is a standardized format for a list of exhibtions, too, please let me know. MenkinAlRire 15:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MenkinAlRire: Indeed the format it was in was what we use for photographer articles: collection name, loction, number of works in the collection at current date, and each sourced to the collection itself. I admit that it is a convention rather than a standardised / documented format or policy. Your edit grouped by location, added location at the beginning of each line, and most importantly added numerous unsourced collections. All additions to biographies of living persons must be properly sourced. The exhibition that is already listed in the Jitka Hanzlová article uses the convention we use for photographers. MOS:ART has a little to suggest in this regard in its "Exhibitions" section, but not a lot. -Lopifalko (talk) 16:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now you have established that it is a mere convention not a standardized format (and no link), I may add, that I never have seen such a listing before. The argument in MOS:ART to minimize the number of exhibitions is valuable and I will keep it in mind. But Wikipedia:BLPSPS doesn't say anything against the collection list I did with the ref of the retrospective catalogue I used (probably adding more refs in the future; there is a connection between exhibtions, awards and aquisitions to collections, that are pretty obvious; links to exhibitions of collections and their publications can serve as additional ref and at the same time keep the exhibition list small).

For me the article has a far more severe flaw. The whole intro is w/o any ref, while dropping names w/o further explanation whatsoever. That is really bad. I didn't edit it yet, since I don't I have anything better. I try to improve the works section atm, step by step, and, as you can see, I give refs, sometimes not until the next edit, it happens. MenkinAlRire 17:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MenkinAlRire: Hi. I will reply when I am able to, but just can't focus at the moment. -Lopifalko (talk) 21:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright. I am working on it. MenkinAlRire 22:20, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lopifalko. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:LGBT culture in Manchester, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lopifalko. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Museum of Street Culture, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:05, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!I am trying to contribute to the page, and you constantly remove my edits when I add the film's synopsis. It's the official film synopsis, published everywhere. Why it cannot it published on the film's wiki page as well? I happened to talk to the director after the screening in new york and asked him if I can make a wikipedia page as the film does not have one. He told me that if I want to, I can, and I can use the information published on the film's social media. The synopsis is also there. Why on the other page of the other film it was allowed? Here? The Mother of All Lies#cite note-17 It's because it's titled 'plot'? Am.Klara (talk) 19:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Am.Klara: Hi. Please read WP:COPYVIO, as I have been directing you to do repeatedly. If the author of the text wishes to put it into the public domain then they need to formally do that, we cannot accept copyrighted work merely on your say-so, that is not how the law works, and not how Wikipedia works. It is not for the subject of the article to say whether it is OK for a Wikipedia article to be written about them. Like you, I am trying to make this article the best that it can be, which so far involves removing your contributions that detract from that quality, such as tangential information, unsourced information, external links that break our policy on WP:EL etc. Everything I do is backed up by Wikipedia policy. You ask "Why on the other page of the other film it was allowed?", please read WP:WHATABOUTISM; if it is a lengthy copy and paste then it should be removed, rather than be justification for doing wrong elsewhere. -Lopifalko (talk) 19:25, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Mother of All Lies "Plot" section has 2 paragraphs, the first is not a direct copy and paste from its source, and the second has a short quote, in quotation marks. The length of the quote is what defines whether or not it can be used or not, as per Fair use. -Lopifalko (talk) 09:04, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry it's me again. Why ahve you removed the sund design and co-producers? It is the information that is always published at many film festivals and it is important to recognise the filmmakers? Why are you removing this based on your subjective decision: On second thoughts, sound design might not be appropriate here Am.Klara (talk) 19:18, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Am.Klara: Please assume good faith. I wasn't working from a subjective motivation. Template:Infobox film states for "music": "Insert the name(s) of the composer(s) of the original music score. They are usually credited with "Music by". Composers credited for "additional music" and songwriters should not be included." and for "producer" states: "Insert the name(s) of the producer(s). ... Only producer credits should be included, not executive producers, associate producers, etc." -Lopifalko (talk) 19:35, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to add this info to the body of the article then please go ahead, if sourced, but do not include it in the Infobox, thanks. -Lopifalko (talk) 19:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope you are well. Regarding Mohamed Aarab draft, I have added reliable Arabic sources to it because there are no sources in English. I hope you will reconsider the request to try to improve and expand the article. Thank you for making Wikipedia.Safe, reliable and vandal-proof Chamosuhdod (talk) 17:41, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Chamosuhdod (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mohamed Aarab (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I hope you are well. I created this draft and tried as much as possible to add reliable sources, as shown. I added reliable Arabic sources because there are no sources in the English language. I also tried to format this artist’s information to be consistent with Wikipedia, but it is rejected. I do not know why, but I added reliable sources. I hope for your help in trying to improve it. Thank you and your efforts. Chamosuhdod (talk) 18:24, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chamosuhdod: It needs to meet the criteria set out in WP:MUSICBIO. I cannot read the Arabic sources, so cannot tell which are independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. You have various paragraphs that do not have any sources. I indicated which these are by adding warnings to each of them. I at least rejected the draft because of these sentences without sources. Even if these sentences are sourced, I could not accept the article because I cannot judge notability by the sources, so I will leave that to someone else. If there are claims that can be made for the subject that would allow them to meet the criteraia of WP:MUSICBIO, other than the sources, such as their music acheievements, such as chart positions, then you should add them to the article. Without that, notability can only be judged by the sources. -Lopifalko (talk) 18:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response and explanation. I have added the sources to the paragraphs I referred to, but they are Arabic sources because there are no sources in the second language. I wish the sources could be translated or anything because they are truly reliable sources. I also referred to the topic. I tried to coordinate and not deviate from the context. I hope to reconsider Chamosuhdod (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you review the draft:Mohamed Aarab I have added everything the other officials requested. I have also reformulated the article again, changing the sources to other sources. I hope you will review it again and give a final decision. Thank you for your effort and I apologize for the inconvenience. Chamosuhdod (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chamosuhdod: Sorry, I cannot help any further. As I have already poited out to you, "I cannot read the Arabic sources, so cannot tell which are independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject." And as another reviewer has already pointed out to you, you still have an unsourced date of birth in there. -Lopifalko (talk) 20:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added a source specifying the date of birth and place of birth, and I also reworded everything in the article, but it has not been reviewed anymore Chamosuhdod (talk) 21:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chamosuhdod: OK I see what you mean about the date of birth, and I have copied that source to the mention of it that I was looking at. -Lopifalko (talk) 21:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you meant well. Is this source unacceptable or do you mean something else? Take a look at the article and tell me what I should add Chamosuhdod (talk) 21:42, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chamosuhdod: No, no, don't worry. I saw the date of birth on the right hand side without a source, and I missed that you had a source in the first sentence for date of birth. -Lopifalko (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed it, so can you help me review it? It is not an advertisement or anything like that, but the article represents a musical figure in Morocco, and the references I added are independent sources. Chamosuhdod (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chamosuhdod: Sorry, no, as I said I cannot review it as I cannot discern for myself that the sources are independent WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV because I do not speak the language. -Lopifalko (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LopifalkoLopifalko Thanks, i look likes need 2 more sources on Draft:The Damone Type of Thing Samchristie05 (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Samchristie05: Let me if know if you find them and I'll review it again. -Lopifalko (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sure, btw do you remember the story of me at the begining that i acted as a Reviewer to approve my own drafts Samchristie05 (talk) 16:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lopifalko, I have removed the excessive hyperlinks form the Draft:Ladislav Hagara article as per your comment. Hopefully, albeit imperfect, the article is now ready to be published and gradually improved in a collaborative fashion. If not, I'll be happy to hear further feedback. Many thanks. PeterRet (talk) 12:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More hyperlinks removed as per your further comment. Many thanks. PeterRet (talk) 12:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lopifalko, thank you for resolving the "overhyperlink" tag :) Apologies for a possibly obvious question, but I'm unfamiliar with the draft review process (the first time I'm going through it) : Do we need to wait for another reviewer to accept / decline my request to move the article back to the main namespace or is this something you can also do (given that you have declined the previous request and provided improvement feedback which have, hopefully, been now all implemented)? Cheers. PeterRet (talk) 13:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterRet: Hi. It's in the queue and as such anyone can review it. Some reviewers might choose to make amendments or indicate areas that need attention, and/or some reviewers might choose to do an actual review. I've not even read the prose yet to know whether it meets the appropriate notability criteria (WP:NPROF, WP:NAUTHOR, WP:NBASIC, WP:ANYBIO) or has sources that verify all of its claims that need verification. I imagine I would have difficulty establishing whether the Slovak sources meet WP:RS, as I don't understand that language, so I might very well not ever be able to give it a positive review, in which case the best I can do is give negative review as a means to inidicating where it needs improvement. I can see without reading its prose that it has an unsourced date of birth, so I would not review positively based on that. -Lopifalko (talk) 19:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, the explanation of the procedure is much appreciated. I added the birthdate source, and will wait for any potential feedbacks from the reviewers. All the sources (even though some of them are in Slovak) should be accessible through Google Translate, which will hopefully facilitate the process. Many thanks. PeterRet (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lopifalko, many thanks for all your work on the article. I have added all the independent sources I could find spanning a nation-wide newspaper (SME.sk), a national Slovak public radio station (this one is only an interview, though), the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic, the Slovak News Agency (TASR = teraz.sk), the biggest science festival in the country (Noc výskumníkov), as well as a library in Toronto showing that Hagara's books have a global distribution. I'm aiming to support WP:NACADEMIC, specifically clause 6: "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society." I hope his tenure as the Chairman of the Slovak Mycological Society of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (the official nation-wide academic institution dedicated to the study and research of fungi) is now well documented and that together with the other data (author of books, a new variety of mushroom species published) it establishes sufficient grounds for notability. Thanks. PeterRet (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterRet: Thanks for improving sources, I will look at those later. And thanks for laying out your justification for notability, this is really helpful. Are you able to summarise the notable aspects of his career in MOS:LEAD? Definitley mention Slovak Mycological Society, but also summarise the other most important aspects as you've done here. -Lopifalko (talk) 10:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I expended the lead paragraph with the additional notability info. Hope this helps. PeterRet (talk) 12:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lopifalko, I've seen the article has been accepted. Many thanks for your guidance in the review process, and the work you have put into improving the article. I will be adding pages for one or two more mycologists in the upcoming days, so I will utilize the learnings from this one, hopefully making the process even smoother. Enjoy the rest of 2023 and all the best for 2024. PeterRet (talk) 16:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterRet: Thank you. I'm pleased that you found the process helpful. To begin, focus on demonstration of notability, and the clincher: independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. It was helpful that you dug those up for this subject. Let me know who else you write about and I'll hopefully have an opportunity to review them. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterRet: Where the article says "he is a member (and between 2015 and 2018 the chairman)" and has sources 10-15, due to WP:OVERCITE the more generic of those sources could do with being removed. -Lopifalko (talk) 15:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lopifalko. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Museum of Street Culture".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lopifalko, and thanks for your work at AfC! I just wanted to drop a friendly note about a draft I just accepted, The Lost Cause (Cory Doctorow novel), which you previously declined. Two book reviews were cited in the draft you declined, which is typically enough to pass WP:NBOOK -- an SNG to keep in mind for your future reviewing! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @LEvalyn: Hi there. I'd been aware that some of the appropriate responses at AFC include redirect and merge, yet I hadn't done any of those, out of a lack of wanting to put the time in to investigate, or, as in the case of books with enough good sources, out of a desire to give them the benefit of the doubt as a promising start. However with this article I had a go, for the reasons as described in my "AFC comment": "WP:NOTPLOT" ("Wikipedia articles should not be: Summary-only descriptions of works.") and "WP:BKTS" ("Wikipedia should not have a standalone article about a book if it is not possible, without including original research or unverifiable content, to write an article on that book that complies with the policy that Wikipedia articles should not be summary-only descriptions of works, contained in criterion 1 of WP:INDISCRIMINATE.") "Merge to Cory Doctorow". Do those reasons not override WP:NBOOK? I realise that the original editor had since added a "Reception" section since my decline. -Lopifalko (talk) 14:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi Lopifalko, thanks for letting me know more about your thinking here. Any problem that can be fixed through normal editing shouldn't lead to an AfC decline -- those articles should be accepted and then tagged for maintenance (e.g., with ((All plot))). That communicates to the article creator that they have in fact cleared the bar for notability and encourages them or other editors to continue improving it. At AfD, WP:BKTS or WP:NOTPLOT would not override WP:NBOOK, and I'd say it's not even possible for BKTS to apply to an NBOOK pass, since the existence of cited reviews means that it is demonstrably possible to write an article that is more than a summary, even if the current version is only a summary. I definitely agree that the added reception section improved this article, but I am concerned that declining a very new editor's very first article is likely to lead to them giving up more often than it will lead to them expanding the article in that way, and Doctorow is a sufficiently popular writer that I don't think it would have languished as all-plot for very long. Since Doctorow is so prolific too, I also think merge wouldn't have been an ideal outcome: the article already had more information than any of his novels get on his bio (e.g., no plot details are recorded there). Everything clearly worked out in this case, but I just wanted to suggest a more generous approach. Thanks again for your work at AfC! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:36, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you review my draft please? trainrobber >be me 18:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trainrobber66: Hi. The article needs to meet the requirements of WP:NGEO. Its current sources are wiltshiregeologygroup.org.uk, gooseygoo.co.uk, The Book Trail, visitoruk.com, www.geocaching.com, hiddenwiltshire.com, and catalogue.millsarchive.org. These do not at first glance appear to be independent WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV of the subject. The only source with some merit appears to be the Chippenham Town Council blog. Perhaps you can find older sources that aren't on the web? -Lopifalko (talk) 17:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit difficult to find old sources but i'll try. trainrobber >be me 18:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend

Hope now everything is ok in this draft.

Thank you Ernestocabral (talk) 04:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Tibetan photographers indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lopifalko, Hope your doing well.

Requesting you to Please Review this Draft Article Draft:Sundaram Master (film)

Thanks in Advance! Bhagi Tirumalasetty (talk) 14:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bhagi Tirumalasetty: WP:TOOSOON for my liking. I would prefer to wait until it has some reviews from independent reliable sources. -Lopifalko (talk) 15:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcchaa, Will get back to you once the draft is ready!

Thankyou! Bhagi Tirumalasetty (talk) 15:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lopifalko, As you said Updated the Movie Reviews. Please check

Thankyou! Bhagi Tirumalasetty (talk) 07:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bhagi Tirumalasetty: I would prefer to see direct quotes in the Reception section, rather than paraphrasing. This is because, having looked at your writing and at the sources, I do not trust that you have paraphrased accurately. With one example I feel that you have brought too much of your own embellishment to the paraphrasing. I don't think you need to include "this weekend". -Lopifalko (talk) 08:28, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done with changes mentioned by you. Please check and Review the draft! Bhagi Tirumalasetty (talk) 09:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bhagi Tirumalasetty: I'm searching the review sources for the quoted text and it isn't there in the sources. -Lopifalko (talk) 11:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lopifalko,

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) 16:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]