User talk:GTrang/Archive 6
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:GTrang, for the period July–December 2017. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
How to move a page?
Hello, I noticed that you are an administrator and you successfully move pages to the titles requested at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. I'm a page mover. When I click on "Move" link, it does not let me to do because the title already exists as a redirect. It says "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid." Can you tell me how I can move a page for those who request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests? Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 13:48, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Smart LION: Actually, I am not an administrator but merely a page mover, just like you. If the target already exists as a redirect to the source with more than one edit in the history, either move it out of way first to some other plausible redirect or do a round-robin page swap. I have answered requests that do not require any special privileges, where the target B was either a redlink or a redirect to the source A with just one edit in the history. In the latter case, a log entry for the target page saying "deleted redirect B by overwriting" will be generated (since December 2016; from August 2016 to November 2016, the log entry just says "deleted page B" like regular admin deletions; and before August 2016, no log entry was generated). If page A was semi-protected, the protection will be preserved after the move and "moved protection settings from A to B" will appear in the logs for page B. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:38, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
Page Koblenz cable car
- Your requested history-merge could not be done, because Draft:Koblenz cable car had only one edit, and that edit was a redirect. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:36, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Anthony Appleyard: I did not request it. You might be referring to Special:Diff/788793970 and Special:Diff/788795051, which were not added by me but rather Da Vinci Nanjing. The following edit, Special:Diff/788851707, was by me, which was probably why you notified me here. You should have notified Da Vinci Nanjing instead. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. Sorry. I have passed the message on to Da Vinci Nanjing. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:11, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2017
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 10, No. 1 — 2nd Quarter, 2017
Previous issue | Index | Next issue 
Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2017, the project has:
|
Content
|
|
(Delivered 14:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC))
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
- Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.
Technology update:
- Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
- The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
- User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
- User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through
General project update:
- Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
RfA
|
Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:01, 24 July 2017 (UTC) |
- @Cullen328: Thank you for being the first WP:300 RfA candidate! I hope that you use deletion, protection, blocking, and user group management wisely and carefully. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 04:28, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Eli Levido
Hi Geoffrey, regarding Eli Levido and the page moves. I am happy to withdraw the prod to allow the page creator move it to the draft space. He has explained on my talk page is that his rationale is that he believes player will play first grade soon (which, if it happens, will make him notable per our guidelines). The editor in question is a new editor who has made mistakes but is improving and so I am trying not to come down hard on his every edit. If the draft space is not appropriate perhaps we can move it to his user space for the time being? Mattlore (talk) 23:50, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Mattlore: I have re-draftified Eli Levido to Draft:Eli Levido and removed the deletion template. My mistake, seeing that the draft still had the prod template in it even after it was moved from the article namespace. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 20:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
I hope I wasn't confusing with the fact that I had to perform an "undo" twice to explain why I moved the pages the way I did without a merge request. If the two pages are merged, an editor will be credited with creating that page who is not the creator of the content. I have seen sanctions placed on an editor who requested their original contribution be restored (which was just a redirect) after an entire article was created just so they could have credit for creating the page. If you disagree with my assessment of this, feel free to restore the tag you placed: I removed it so that an admin (probably Anthony Appleyard) would not execute the merge request prior to us having a chance to discuss the tag. (I mean, granted, I'm certain that Anthony Appleyard will determine that the two pages have parallel histories and this deny the request, but there's no guarantee of that.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
History-merge query
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
Technology update:
- Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.
General project update:
- The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
- Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
- To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Current Events page template updates
@GeoffreyT2000: Hello! I have noticed that you have maintained the Current Events archive [1] and I would like to thank you for that. It is a rather thankless task I would assume, yet so needed. I wanted to let you know that I have been working on improving the layout of Current Events and the sidebar components to be more mobile friendly. I'm not sure where you get each month's calendar for the page, but I would note that the latest versions will have an updated format. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to make this easier. It seems like a module should be able to generate those archive calendars quite easily. — RossO (talk) 23:16, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
As a matter of fact, I've worked up a version of the calendar that can dynamically create the calendar that any CE Monthly Archive page will need: Portal:Current events/June 2017/Sandbox which uses Module:Current events archive calendar. Mr. Stradivarius has been helpful in getting the calendar generation code to a more modern structure. I'm hoping that the Mobile-friendly Layout project will be able to improve the Current events archives in the same way we're working on the front page. — RossO (talk) 17:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
I have now moved forward on the updated Calendar generator and applied it to the Archived Current events pages for 2017 and for Portal:Current events/December 1996. I would like your comments on the code updates before I update all of the monthly archive pages to use the new Calendar generator. The unified calendar module supports the "Only show the last 6 days" version used on Portal:Current events and supports the archived Current Events pages. The remaining issue is that it assumes a non-table based layout. This causes some margin issue on the layout which I will touch up soon.
I hope that this will save some of your time each month (or on the yearly process of) pre-creating the /Calendar pages. I also hope that having this code in one place will make it easier to move the Current events portal and all of the archive pages to a mobile-friendly layout. Cheers! — RossO (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I would love to hear your feedback about the updates I've made here: [2] and particularly of the Intro Paragraph generator here: [3] I am attempting to make the Archive pages all use a common set of templates so that we can upgrade the look and feel of them to be mobile-friendly. This is a step in that direction. — RossO (talk) 00:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- I do like your changes, RossO. Calendars for months in the years 1997 to 2016 should then also invoke Module:Current events calendar. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
request move undoing a previous move
Hi, I am going through deja vu because I looked into this before. For some reason DeWitt Post Office shows up in my watchlist again, and I revisit it, and I see again that it is for a post office in DeWitt, Arkansas, and I am reminded again that there are more than one DeWitt Post Offices in the world, including in most or all of the following places: DeWitt, Illinois; DeWitt, Iowa; DeWitt, Michigan; DeWitt, New York; DeWitt, Virginia; DeWitt Charter Township, Michigan; DeWitt Township, DeWitt County, Illinois. So I go to move it again, to make way for disambiguation in the longer term, and to leave it marked as a {{Redirect with possibilities}} for now. Again I encounter the fact that the move doesn't work because there is something already at DeWitt Post Office (DeWitt, Arkansas), which is a redirect. I look at the edit history and find it is you (maybe i did that before) and this time I come to your Talk page to make this request: Could you please undo your move of it, and please put the redirect with possibilities in place. --doncram 00:31, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Done, but please remember to actually create the articles showing that a disambiguation page at DeWitt Post Office is needed. Otherwise, the article DeWitt Post Office (DeWitt, Arkansas) might need to be moved to the undisambiguated title again. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 00:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for reading and considering and doing that and replying. I don't want to have an argument, but I am not sure that an article for another DeWitt Post Office has to be created in any short time frame at all, and there might not be one soon because the DeWitt, New York one or another one might have to get listed on the National Register (which is possible) before it would be clearly Wikipedia-notable and to have separate article. It still remains that the DeWitt, New York one, and perhaps others, are more prominent in the world than the Arkansas one is, and readers would be surprised and think it is wrong that they arrive at the Arkansas one, if it were changed back. The truth is that it is kind of random and surprising that the Arkansas one is deemed notable by the combination of the NRHP processes and by our processes; a lesser place is in fact pushed forward in Wikipedia. It would simply be "wrong" in my view for it to be changed so that Wikipedia is asserting, against reason, that the Arkansas one is THE place and push it even further forward. I don't know whether this line of reasoning is embodied in any guideline on place naming or in any essay. But like i said before, this one has nagged me, and it boils down partly to the fact that I "know" that Wikipedia was getting it wrong by covering the more obscure one and doubly so by seeming to assert that was normal/best/that it is THE place. Whew, good to get that off my chest, maybe? Or maybe too much written. Anyhow, thanks again. --doncram 02:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Please help
Hi Geoffrey,
You recently declined my page (draft:jah levi) because of a problem with citations. I am confused because last year someone helped with citations and it seemed like everything was good but we needed more references, which have been added in the same format.
Can you tell me what I am doing wrong and how to correct it?
Wiki is not the most user-friendly for us non-techie types.
Many thanks.Kabbalahhouse (talk) 15:04, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
CE archive updates
I'm working on updates to the Current Events archive pages: User:RossO/sandbox#Curent_Events_Portal_Archive I thought you might be interested in my findings. — RossO (talk) 00:33, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Ways to improve List of Super Why episodes
Hi, I'm ThePromenader. GeoffreyT2000, thanks for creating List of Super Why episodes!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hello,
Your article submission references all come from a single source... that doesn't seem to exist.
Do try to diversify your sources (to working links) if you can.
Best.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Theatre Of Shadows
Why do you keep redirecting the film, Haunted State: Theatre Of Shadows? I'm confused. (Adjinwis (talk) 00:25, 14 September 2017 (UTC))
I'd like to know what you need to keep it live on the site... other admins have edited it but not removed it. Can you explain what this article needs for you to not remove it? Adjinwis (talk) 11:19, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Adjinwis: It needs reliable sources! This is the number one rule for notability on Wikipedia. NatGertler restored the redirect I created. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 22:21, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not IMDb, and is not intended to catalog all films, merely notable ones. For a guide on what it takes to qualify as a notable film, see WP:NFILM. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
- Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!
Technology update:
- The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225
General project update:
- On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
- Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
- To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks!
Hi Geoffrey, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 22:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
- We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.
Technology update:
- Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.
General project update:
- The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
- To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
FYI
Draft:Tiffany Moníque and Draft:Tiffany Monique are not my creations, I just added the {{submit}} template. The creator of both pages is @Weddingdock: and had moved it to projet space. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:15, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your super fast reaction in fixing my error at User:Valentino Talluto
As you can probably guess, I attempted to move a page from draft to mainspace and forgot to set the scroll down menu to "(Article)" in the correct manner. I've not made this mistake before and was getting a bit flustered reading the documentation on how to handle the issue, when I saw that you'd already fixed it. Please accept my apologies for taking up your time and appreciation for helping out. Yours Edaham (talk) 05:15, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of Harrison Fuller
Resolved6 months ago, you deleted the page I had created, Harrison Fuller. In retrospect, I respect your decision to remove the page, as my client was not relevant enough to have a Wikipedia page. But now I believe he is relevant enough to have a page created about him.
In the last six months, he has won over 38 international film awards, had 26 nominations, and 2 wins at international festivals such as
AAHSFF Catalina Film Festival, St. Albans Film Festival, Austin Indie Film Festival, 300 Seconds Film Festival, Newark Film Festival, Atlanta Film Festival,
and more.
In additon, he has a google knowledge graph, a bing knowledge graph, and an 18,000 starmeter rank on IMDb.
I hope you'll consider revising this decision.
Thanks!
Page Northeast India
Thank you for moving the page! RenZutↂ 06:41, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Crowhurst (film) proposed deletion.
Hi, I note that you proposed the film Crowhurst (film) for deletion and the grounds were that it hasn't been released yet. There seem to be many thousands of films in Wikipedia who are also yet to be released, including the one to be released by the same studio about the same subject, entitled The Mercy (due out next year too): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mercy So we don't have any continuing issues, I'd love to know the exact rules are concerning this. Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sterpix (talk • contribs) 19:53, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sterpix, WP:NFF gives a breakdown of when a future film might be considered worth having, and when it's just a crystal ball or TOOSOON and should be deleted. Future films that have little or no coverage are generally deleted, as are films that haven't actually started principal photography. For example, Avatar 2 was a redirect for three years because even though it was being made, principal photography didn't start until a few months ago.
- As for The Mercy, I haven't looked at the references in any detail but it does have almost a dozen of them. Additionally, every page must be judged on its own merits, so the simple fact that this page exists does not mean we must keep the Crowhurst page. Primefac (talk) 21:20, 19 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Dj Lytmas
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Dj Lytmas. Since, your close at a related AfD has been heavily challenged:) Winged Blades Godric 07:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
New Article Review
Dear Geoffrey,
Please review this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_based_theory_of_economic_cycles when you have time for this.
Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gevlare (talk • contribs) 09:48, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank for the review. I will fix all issues as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gevlare (talk • contribs) 08:02, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, GeoffreyT2000. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
20:34:04, 4 December 2017 review of submission by BlueAnt
Hi,
I created the Bugcrowd page and included links to several reliable sources, many of them were major national news networks/sites, and the articles do not promote the subject they just cover the news about the subject. Can you help me understand what the issue is with my sources?
When writing this page I looked at a similar company, HackerOne, which includes very similar sources and doesn't cite sources for many claims. Yet it was deemed notable and worthy. Can you help me understand the discrepancy?
- Update on Dec 4th* I just added some more primary sources, in hopes that they'll fit what you're looking for. Please let me know if those suffice :)
Thank you, BlueAnt — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueAnt (talk • contribs) 20:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- @BlueAnt: The draft was re-declined by NewYorkActuary, suggesting that it be merged into Bug bounty program. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
References/Notability/Promotional for Dr. Alizadeh
Regarding Draft:Kaveh_Alizadeh and your comment "This still does not appear to have reliable secondary sources that fix the problem of being promotional.": I don't believe you are referring to the Wall Street Journal, 60 Minutes, The Doctors, and other media outlets that have done stories focusing on him, his work, and his nonprofit, correct? My guess at this point is that you object the links I provided to various practices/businesses/etc. to confirm his status as co-founder or being on the board, etc., which I did for ease of confirmation of his background. Given that nothing I cited was in the realm of "announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism," nor "[p]lanned coverage of scheduled events ... [w]edding announcements, sports scores, crime logs" or similar items, per Wikipedia's stated guidelines, I am wondering whether there are too many citations? These are just about all independent, third-party articles or basic bio or staff pages:
• a Columbia University article focused on the nonprofit he founded
• a Wall Street Journal article focused on the nonprofit he founded
• a link to a Medical Society of the State of New York roster to confirm his status as president of the NY Regional Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• a link to the New York State Society of Plastic Surgeons officers' page to confirm his status as past president of the executive council
• a link to Westchester Medical Center to confirm he is chief of plastic and reconstructive surgery there
• a link to New York Medical College to confirm he is associate professor of surgery there
• a link to Westchester Medical Center to confirm he is co-founder of the headache team
• a link to New York Migraine Associates to confirm he is co-founder of the group
• a Hudson Valley News Network article on a nationally recognized surgery for which he headed up the plastic surgery team
• a Bloomberg profile to confirm the identity of his brother
• a NYMag article and W. article to confirm the identity of his wife
• links to his alma mater to confirm his distinguished alumni status and guest speaking
• a link to U.S. News and World Report to confirm he attended Cornell
• a link to Long Island Plastic Surgical Group to confirm it is the largest and oldest private academic practice in North America
• a link to his nonprofit Mission: Restore as the citation for quoting its mission statement
• a link to CBS News to confirm his work with the Global Medical Relief Fund
• Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans articles about his receiving the Ellis Island Medal of Honor, and the society's own database of winners to confirm
• a link to the Center for Asian American Media to confirm an award for the documentary made about Dr. Alizadeh
• a Nassau County article about his recognition for performing surgery on a Taliban victim
• a link to the Iranian American Society of New York to confirm his humanitarian recognition
• links to 60 Minutes for stories on his work with a bomb victim
• links for his appearance on The Doctors for his work with the Taliban victim
• a CNN interview of his with Sanjay Gupta
• a New York Times article for which he is a source as an expert in ethnic plastic surgery
I respectfully ask that you let me know which of these you feel should be eliminated and/or if you truly believe the Wall Street Journal, 60 Minutes, The Doctors, CNN, Hudson Valley News, and others are not sufficiently reputable/reliable/independent sources. Thanks! Alikouros (talk) 18:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Just checking in again, GeoffreyT2000. I would appreciate it if you could let me know what about the national media I cited you found to be insufficient. Thanks! Alikouros (talk) 21:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
ANI Experiences survey
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.
Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.
Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| You rock Gevlare (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2017 (UTC) |
CityFALCON review
Hi Geoffrey!
CityFALCON article that you proposed for deletion has been improved. More sources has been added. Please take a look.Gevlare (talk) 15:31, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
- Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!
Outreach and Invitations:
- If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with:
{{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.
New Year New Page Review Drive
- A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
- Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.
General project update:
- ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
- The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
- To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
How was it possible to overlook this unsourced edit when half an hour later adding a notability tag to the article on 23 July? And in preparation of the second AFD nomination on 11 December it was again overlooked. Sam Sailor 10:45, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
- Since you neither reply to my question here, nor to my question regarding WP:BEFORE in your second AFD nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seyed Mohammad Hosseini (presenter) (2nd nomination), please provide a straight answer: to what extent do you read and understand Farsi? Sam Sailor 00:18, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor: I do not understand Farsi. I simply searched on Google using the default English name, which of course will give results that have nothing to do with the above article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- Why do you dabble in, let alone nominate for deletion, an article where you admit to lack competence? The problem is, that other users now have !voted "delete" in the AFD discussion. What are you suggesting we could do in this situation? I am also interested to hear, how you overlooked the crap section in the article when you nominated it. Sam Sailor 01:39, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor: I added the notability tag only because I still feel that the presenter fails the notability guideline despite previous AfDs being closed as "no consensus". And I then renominated the same article for deletion because I had previously nominated it once before, and wanted a consensus for deletion to emerge. The best thing is to let the AfD run after you removed the unsourced section. Well, now the article has been deleted by Coffee. Stop worrying too much on this AfD as it was already closed. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:12, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Why do you dabble in, let alone nominate for deletion, an article where you admit to lack competence? The problem is, that other users now have !voted "delete" in the AFD discussion. What are you suggesting we could do in this situation? I am also interested to hear, how you overlooked the crap section in the article when you nominated it. Sam Sailor 01:39, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Sam Sailor: I do not understand Farsi. I simply searched on Google using the default English name, which of course will give results that have nothing to do with the above article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Please come and help...
Should MoS shortcut redirects be sorted to certain specific maintenance categories? An Rfc has been opened on this talk page to answer that question. Your sentiments would be appreciated! Paine Ellsworth put'r there 17:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
New Years new page backlog drive
Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!
We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!
The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.
Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:
- The total number of reviews completed for the month.
- The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.
NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)