Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12

For NewsLetters and Subscriptions click here

Think
Think before you write.
If you want to talk with me, follow these simple rules:

• Make sure I can understand the message you are trying to convey
• Please link back to the article to which you are referring
• English only please, my native tongue of "New Yorker" was forcibly removed by NYC Dept of Ed speech therapists
• In the words of Winston Churchill: "short words are best, and the old words, when short, are best of all"
  

To start a new conversation create a new section at the end of the page, easily done by clicking "New section" along the top menu. Putting something in the middle will not be seen.

Hello. My edits were completely constructive and factual. They provide a source that the "official seal" of Seminole Heights is a hoax. It also provides the original source the false seal claims to have come from—the 1912 Hillsborough High School Yearbook. I have access to the yearbook and this false seal does not appear anywhere in it's pages, and the faked seal doesn't even have the company name correct. Please cease reverting my changes as they are valid and sourced. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4thgenTPA (talk • contribs)

When the source claims an image as proof that a seal existed in a year book, the only source that can refute that is an image of the original, unaltered source. What other source would you like me to provide? Certainly any other source would be second hand in this case. This isn't an image that disproves another image as factual, it's not being provided as a source to make a claim.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4thgenTPA (talk • contribs)

Hello Loriendrew,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Hello Loriendrew,

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Hello Loriendrew,

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.

The redirect Wikipedia:Childname has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 3 § Wikipedia:Childname until a consensus is reached. — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:36, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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[reply]

Hello @Loriendrew

My edit to the page human height was reverted and changed back to:

The tallest living man is Sultan Kösen of Turkey at 251 cm (8 ft 3 in) and the tallest living woman is Siddiqa Parveen of India at 234 cm (7 ft 8 in).

This statement is not backed by any source, and the Wikipedia article on Siddiqa Parveen states that she was "formerly listed by Guinness World Records as the tallest living woman", which I believe makes it clear that for whatever reason, that title no longer holds. The current wikipeda article on Rumeysa Gelgi states that, as of the present, "she is the tallest living woman confirmed by Guinness World Records." The Guinness World Records official website also confirms the same (https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/tallest-woman-living-). I am restoring the edit, this time citing the Guinness World Records page as a source.

I hope this clears up any confusion, and I do admit that it is quite unclear, as any 'official' sources on this matter are scant, and the data seems to conflict with each other (Siddiqa Parveen is stated to be 234 cm, but Rumeysa Gelgi is apparently only 215.16 cm; I am not aware why Siddiqa Parveen does not hold the record as of now, but Guinness clearly states as such).

Apologies for any confusion or lack of clarity in my writing.

Regards,

EmperorBonaparte

EmperorBonaparte (talk) 06:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The copyvio goes back further than the two revisions you've tagged for revdel. You need to identify when the material was first added as it's all those revisions that will require deletion. Nthep (talk) 19:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Think I found the correct range and updated the notice. My apologies.. have not had much revdel experience.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No apology needed. Getting your head round the scale of some copyvios and how far back they go can be quite staggering. I know it shocked me when I first started looking at them. Nthep (talk) 07:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It went a lot further back, to November 2013! Nthep (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am so sorry, was looking for some specific phrases which popped up within my range. If we do this again, just send me the "More!" meem and I will dive further.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 17:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd suggest Wikipedia:Who Wrote That? as a tool for finding out who added the text. Nthep (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The redirect Battle of Sialkot(1761) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 18 § Battle of Sialkot(1761) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 21:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello I saw you added to Steve Earle's page that he has a daughter with a groupie. I am not a regular editor here, but think this should at least be framed as speculation. The source you used is an unsourced aggregation site, and as I noted on the talk page there, the claim is unsubstantiated. There are two well researched biographies of Earle, which I think should take precedence. St. John does mention the claim by Baker, and it may well be true, but Earle denied it and there was never an attempt to prove paternity at the time. It is not impossible that she has since used Ancestry or something similar, but there would need to be a source. 131.238.215.0 (talk) 14:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This information was not added by me, just moved it into chronological order and formatted the entry and citation.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 21:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message, which was the first I saw of the merge. Yes, I felt there were enough references for a stand alone page, especially with the change in location and size of the production (Netflix) Hildreth gazzard (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]