User talk:Insertcleverphrasehere/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz

Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

Deryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
• A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
• A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

• Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
• To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
• Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
• Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

• Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for submitting a proposal and congrats on the recognition of having a top idea in the meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Results Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks very much, but it wasn't entirely my idea, most of this stuff was other people's work, I just helped gather it together to be put to the community. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 15:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR backlog

Just an observation, but the backlog is now almost 4,500 and still rising at the same cadence. if one extrapolates the graph, it's not hard to see where it's going. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

To the Moon! No idea how to solve that. After 90? days everything is indexed anyway so maybe we should just call those pages patrolled because no one felt strongly enough against them to seek deletion. Legacypac (talk) 06:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, Kudpung. It's an issue for sure. At the moment I am waiting to see how the Christmas period goes, as last year we really got on top of the backlog during that period when people had more time off. Unfortunately don't have much time myself to devote to the issue just now. The bigger issue is that the back of the backlog is now 8 days over the index point, which IS a significant issue (and no we can't just let them fall into mainspace, experience shows that even though they have fallen through the backlog for 90 days, there are still copyvios and other stuff that gets missed). I'll post a backlog update to the reviewer's noticeboard soon to highlight the issue. Sorry I haven't been able to be more active in recent weeks. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 10:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, Kudpung Actually the back of the backlog is only a little over 2 months old, the older articles are only a few stragglers. I've posted a backlog update on NPR talk, hopefully that will help people visualise the issue and will encourage a bit more reviewing. the trend has started to level off in the last month or so, and hopefully this means we can reverse the growing backlog and get the trend sloping in the other direction. Time will tell. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 12:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Don't we have bots checking mainspace for copyvio? Legacypac (talk) 16:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, Sort of. We have a bot which autocopypatrols mainspace, but it still misses stuff, and all it does is flag it at the new pages feed. It will be interesting to see how effective it is. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 16:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

When faced with an impossible task, one has to prioritize and find ways to streamline. There is infinage work to be done at Wikipedia in many areas. I know just one user reduced the backlog some months back but I've watched it grow and grow ever since. I'm mainly focused on AfC where we've beat down the backlog but its ticking up again. Legacypac (talk) 16:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, There is no impossible task whatsoever. We will continue to plug away at it, but letting stuff just fall into mainspace because it reaches the three month mark will never be the solution to NPP. It was attitudes like this that led to the backlog exploding to 22,000+ articles and reaching over 9 months long. If we can review that, our current issues are minor. We are actually only falling behind by a small margin. Consider that roughly 300-350 articles come in each day that need to be reviewed, we are only falling behind by about 30 articles a day (on average). This means that on average we are reviewing only 10% less than what we need to be doing to keep it steady, and if we increased by only 20% it would trend downward at the same rate. I reiterate that there is nothing impossible in our task. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 17:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Kubrick

'Massive heart attack' is very common vernacular in the US. However, since the severity of the heart attack is implicit in the fact that he died from it, I've simply removed any descriptor, since it's unnecessary. Cheers. Anastrophe (talk) 22:30, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Anastrophe, that works also. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 23:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice

Hi ICPH, see here. Instead of discussing at Wikipedia_talk:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers this patroller instead decided to escalate a non-issue to dispute resolution involving other NPPs and where over-zealous admins start threatening blocks. This is just a notice to bring it to your attention, I have no further interest in that page. Polyamorph (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Growth team updates #4

Welcome to the fourth newsletter for the new Growth team!  

The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.

We need your feedback!

We have two requests for community members:

1. Now that data is coming in for the welcome survey, we are planning how to use that data to personalize the newcomer's first day. See our current thoughts here, and join the conversation here.
2. Try out the help panel's interactive prototype, and read about how we're planning to roll it out, and post any thoughts or reactions here.

Two Growth team projects have been deployed (detailed updates here)

• Personalized first day (welcome survey) was deployed on November 20 on both Czech and Korean Wikipedias.
  • The survey is now being shown to half of new users (A/B test). Responses are being recorded in the database. We'll report on initial results during December.
  • We are planning to test a second version of the survey, called "Variation C", which we think will maximize the number of users who complete the survey and stay on the wiki.
  • The original objective of this project was to give newcomers the materials they need to achieve their goals, and so now we are currently planning how we will use the information collected in the welcome survey to personalize the newcomer's experience. We hope community members will read our current thinking and join the conversation here. Some of the plans we are considering include:
    • Making it easy for newcomers to see editing activity around the topic areas in which they indicated that they're interested.
    • Connecting interested newcomers to experienced editors.
    • Surfacing the help content most relevant to the reason for which the newcomers created their accounts.

• Understanding first day (EditorJourney) was deployed on November 15 on both Czech and Korean Wikipedias. It has been done after a longer security review and final testing than expected. Data is now being recorded for all new users on those wikis, and we've been auditing the data and preparing to make initial reports during December. Stay tuned for the next newsletter!

Help panel is under construction

• Focus on help desk (help panel) is planned to be deployed during the week of January 7 on both Czech and Korean Wikipedias.
• This interactive prototype is the best way to see the design and wording in the feature.
• We ran live user tests on the prototype, with results posted here.
• In addition to giving the ability to ask a question, the help panel will also contain a set of links to existing help content. Our ambassadors on Czech and Korean Wikipedias are determining the right initial set of most helpful links in this task.
• We encourage community members to try out the prototype and read about the rules for who will get the feature, and add any thoughts to this discussion.

We are still looking for volunteers

Do you want to participate to our experiments? We are looking for new communities to work with us (especially a new mid-size wiki), and people to become ambassadors to help us to communicate with the different communities. Discover how you can involve yourself or your community.

Also, please share this update with your community and interested people!

Learn more about us

You can visit our team page to find out why our team was formed and how we are thinking about new editors, and our project updates page for detailed updates on the projects we work on.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot, 09:31, 7 December 2018 (UTC) • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

Marking as reviewed

Hello ICPH, I thought it best to mark a page as reviewed, along with prodding it, as I did on Simon Hope Broadbent; the prod was the result of my review. Not sure then why you subsequently marked it as unreviewed? UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

UnitedStatesian Sorry, I meant to send you a note but when going back through my edits I must have missed you. PRODed and CSD tagged articles should not be marked as reviewed, per consensus here. It stops them falling through the cracks if the PROD is removed and the original reviewer doesn't notice (read the linked discussion above for more info). I wasn't implying that your review wasn't accurate or that the article should not be deleted, it's just how we decided to do it moving forward. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 10:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Infobox discretionary sanctions

The infobox discretionary sanctions alert was posted here at 07:11, 2 April 2018 and archived 30 minutes later. The alert is active until April 2019 and an Arbcom infobox remedy is available to prevent disruptive commentary in areas where experience shows that a lot of time has been wasted with pointless arguments. I will contact the administrator who placed Talk:Stanley Kubrick under discretionary sanctions to have that remedy enforced if you continue referring to the issue. Any further comments would only be disruption. Johnuniq (talk) 09:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Johnuniq, And how is hounding newcomers to the page not disruptive? I don't see a comment on SchroCat's talk page, and the infobox discretionary sanctions do not mean "cannot discuss". This seems to be your interpretation here, and this interpretation is leading to the real disruption on that page of not being able to have a discussion at all. SchroCat even deleted part of one of my comments... In any case, barring another strawman being put up of me, I'm finished with the current discussion of editor behaviour. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 10:02, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Is

this any used? I fail to see any reason why anybody (who has supposedly mentioned on his t/p or help-desk that he wishes to have his new-article deleted) need to be informed of the subsequent tagging! If anything is necessary, the deleting admin can leave some message about executing his wishes and allied stuff. ∯WBG^converse 15:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Also G6ed Template:Db-banned-notice-NPF (any reasons to preserve it?).

Further, see the tweaks over these edits of mine. ∯WBG^converse 15:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Wish list

Please see this. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:26, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

it's now being followed up. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:26, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

New Page coordination

Hey, I was looking through Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#New Page Review Coordinators and saw that one of the tasks is coordinating with other language wikipedia projects. While I assume that most of this coordination occurs in English, I'd figure that it would be at least marginally useful for whoever's doing this to be able to read/write in the languages relevant to the wikis we'd be cooperating with. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help out, particularly with the Spanish, German, French, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, Catalan, Yiddish, or Hebrew projects. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:33, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Rosguill, I'll keep that in mind. Coordinating with those guys will be advantageous once Community tech starts working on the de-localisation task. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 00:35, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Newsletter

I deliberately left out the graph from my draft of the newsletter and replced it with the NPP logo for obvius reasons. "If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today." is just giving Horn exactly what he wants to deny the requests. You must remember that the poll is only a guideline for the WMF; there are no promises whatsoever to address even the top voted requests. Let me take care of the VP notification. If we blast Wikipedia with too much right now it will piss people off. I did say that I had one or two things up my sleeve. At the moment I'm not confident at all that the NPP wishes will get any attention from the WMF. The EC is being carefully shielded from the day-to-day office operations and the WMF is now set up so that there is no direct line of contact to her. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Kudpung Well, I don't think it likely that we don't get into the top ten, and danny was pretty explicit that they wouldn't be working on it if it didn't get in the top ten so I'd rather not sugar-coat it. As for the graph, well, I thought that the newsletter should have the new graph by Musik in it as the old one is going to be discontinued soon. the Christmas period is coming up, and NPP did really well during that last year to reduce the backlog; I thought the graph would be a nice subtle reminder that we are currently slowly falling behind on the backlog. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 10:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Be careful which bow you play your fiddle with. What you play may be drifting across to enemy lines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:39, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Well by my rough count we're at 100 supports which is a great accomplishment you two have achieved - that should be enough already to get us into the top 10. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Barkeep49, I think so, based on previous year's turnout anyway. The Wishlist might be more popular this year than previously though, and we still have two weeks of voting to go; so i'll count my chickens when they hatch. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 08:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi all, I just want to clarify: with 130 votes right now, it's basically guaranteed that the NPP proposal will be in the top 10. That means that the Community Tech team will be working on that project next year, guaranteed. If it ends up as #1 with such a high margin -- and I think it probably will -- then that gives the project more weight with the team. You all are currently doing the correct thing to get the result that you want. This is the correct procedure, and you're participating successfully. Community Tech will work on this project. -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 01:59, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm glad my optimism is shared by Danny. I said it in my last comment but let me again state my thanks of the leadership ICPH and kudpung have displayed in making this happen. I'll probably end up writing it a few more times which I hope you two will forgive. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Barkeep49, in view of the extent and scope of the requirements, in order not to compromise the requests by other projects in the top-ten, a call is being made to increase the WMF personell allocated to this task.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

More personnel would be great. Just to clarify Kudpung when you say a call is being made do you mean that you are asking for it (calling for it) or that a decision (a call) has been made to actually increase it? If the latter great. If the former, fingers crossed. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:45, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Barkeep49 Please note again my use of the English passive. No decision has been made, but I am working already towards a discussion in that direction. I just need to establish the lines of hierarchy within the WMF, which are vague at best, but I have been given some leads for it by a very senior WMFer, who is also a good freind of many years. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Newsletter 2

" We need to increase our reviewing rate by at least 10% to arrest the rise, so please put in just a few reviews each day." - this is just not fair on the few active reviewers. The only purpose it serves is to put the active reviewers under more pressure to do more work A call should be made to the other 600 inactive reviewers and hat collectors to use the tools they asked for. I think I will start an RfC for the removal of the NPR right after six months - that's what they do at AfC. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Kudpung, It is the truth unfortunately. I'd be in support of an RfC like that, so long as they are given a nice message indicating that they can request the rights be turned back on, subject to scrutiny etc. I don't want people bitten. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 00:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

I too would support it and would suggest a 1 month implementation grace period so people get a couple notices about it. I think having an accurate understanding of the depth of the NPP reviewing pool is important. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

This is nothing to do with people being bitten - it's not as if they are new users, but there are certainly a lot of hat collectors among them or those who asked for the right, were given it, tried it a few times and decided they couldn't be bothered. Your own (or whoever makes them) excellent stats show quite clearly who is doing most of the work and who is practically dormant. Since I had the right created I still watch PERM although for a long time I have left the allocation of right s up to other admins such as Joe Roe, Beeblebrox, DeltaQuad, TonyBallioni and others. Possibly also a time limited probation for an application for the rights should be the default, such as six months. This would be at admin discretion but would not need an RfC. There are other solutions, such as messaging the inactive users directly and asking them if they intend using their rights. I think the newwsletter text was good as it stood; whether the new version is milder or not it does not address the problem. A lot of hard work has gone into getting the WMF to address the improvements to the tools and this effort should not be wasted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

I have refactored and updated the newsletter draft. I hope this version meets with your approval. If it does, I will send it out tomorrow. (BTW, mass messages do not require a personal signature, the sender's name is automatically included in the code but is not displayed. This is because news letters are generally considered a community/project information). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:16, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Kudpung, Yeah it looks fine to me. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 00:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

You may wish to see the recent comment on my talk page by Ceoi. I fully support your opinion on this and I'm not going to let this issue rest. NPR is far more important even than Featured Articles, even if the complaininat is a prolific editior. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Kudpung, Yeah I saw the comment. I've already left a message for him on the reviewer's noticeboard. #Boleyndidnothingwrong — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 00:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

I will shortly be arriving at my office and I have no time for the rest of the day. I'm beginning to find Ceiol's harrasment somewhat tiresome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Cristmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.

Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy new year

	Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2019!
	Hi Insertcleverphrasehere, Sending you a warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019 and may this new year bring you joy and laughter. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Insertcleverphrasehere,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Alex Render

Ah I see, I was the one who added the PROD anyway so I would have followed it through. In future, I'll avoid reviewing them also. Thanks. Kosack (talk) 11:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Kosack, Yeah no worries, I didn't expect the word to spread widely (forgot to add it to the newsletter) so I've just been checking every once in a while and informing people. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 11:36, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

addressing the issues raised concerning the new page Douglas W. Mitchell

Thank you for the comments ICPH. I am new to editing wikipedia. A bit confused about the tag "uncategorized". There were several categories tied to the page and I have now added a few more. Regarding the tag "refimprove" I added several new references to a new section titled "contributions" The tag "notability" is also addressed in the new section. In anticipation of your reply I am for now removing the tags from the article. Thanks again. Rbalvers (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Rbalvers, There were some categories that were added immediately after the edit where I added the uncategorised tag, by another user. Note that the referencing in the article still needs a lot of work. He is notable due to passing WP:PROF based on his body of work, but very little of the material written about him in the article can be cited to reliable source. There is a citation to a PDF of his CV! What sort of conflict of interest do you have regarding Douglas W. Mitchell? — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 19:09, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Insertcleverphrasehere, RbalversI feel compelled to point out that revealing the real name of a Wikipedian without a source and their explicit consent is a form of WP:OUTING and should be redacted immediately. Vexations (talk) 19:24, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Vexations, That is a very good point. I already sent a message to the Wikipedian in question. He seems fairly active, so not sure if we should let him take the next steps himself, or just redact it and request revision deletion immediately. What do you recon? — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 19:30, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Insertcleverphrasehere, my guess is that the editor and his subject know each other. It is likely consent is granted or assumed in good faith. It remains unsourced assertion in a BLP so may be removed per WP:BLPSOURCES Vexations (talk) 19:37, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Vexations, Looks like he isn't a fan of the wikipedian information being there (comment on his talk page). I'll request revision deletion as well. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 19:38, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

xaosflux, Swarm, and TonyBallioni seem to have been active recently. Perhaps one of you guys could hit the page history of the page in question. At the same time, could you also head over to the Wikipedian's talk page and redact the last few edits from the first one I made (I'm going to avoid mentioning the user's name here so that won't have to be redacted too). — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 19:51, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I did obtain consent to reveal the name of the Wikipedian. I have no conflict of interest, ICPH. Mitchell is a former colleague and we have published three papers together which I deliberately am not mentioning on the page. My perspective is that Mitchell is the smartest person I know, who has had a huge influence on his students, colleagues, and his profession. He is overdue for a bio which I have tried to design here (with help of other colleagues, students, and Princeton fellow-grad students of Mitchell's). Complicating the issue is that Mitchell is currently suffering from end-stage cancer. We would like him to see the page. We are slow in getting his cv listed at WVU where he is Prof. Emeritus since some of the IT staff there are objecting. So, for the time being I stored it on my own homepage, which is indeed not a proper citation! We will appreciate any further guidance. Thanks! Rbalvers (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Rbalvers, from a comment on his talk page, it seems like he isn't keen on having his wikipedia usernames on the page. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 20:02, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Rbalvers, It looks like this is all resolved adequately now with the page histories redacted. While he might not be keen on his Wiki usernames being on the page, the page is relatively safe as clearly passing WP:PROF, and reasonably well written given the citations available. Unfortunately there are not a ton of good sources available to write from, so the article has to focus on his professional achievements, but that is not the end of the world. Thank you for putting this submission together. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 23:25, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

ICPH, thank you very much for the help. Not sure now how to proceed in dealing with the unclear citation style and inappropriate references. What would it take to be able to remove the tags? Would it be sufficient if the cv can be listed at WVU and referred to at that address? Thanks. Rbalvers (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Rbalvers, I've dealt with the outstanding issues to the best of my ability and removed the tags from the article. As for the CV, if some of the most pertinent information on it could be listed on a page at the university as a summary of his works and the importance of them, then it could be used as a ref. It would still be affiliated, but could be used to cite clearly uncontroversial and unlikely to be challenged material (which the whole article is pretty much at this point). A CV in general isn't great, regardless of where it is posted as it gives the appearance of promotionalism. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 00:11, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Page looks great with your help, ICPH. Much appreciated! All changes make sense. Last question I have is if it would be ok to remove some of the personal and sensitive information about the 'subject' from this thread on your user page here? Rbalvers (talk) 17:11, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Evertech Sandbox

Hi. Recently you unreviewed an article I had reviewed, with the comment that If you reviewed this article, please note that PRODed and CSD tagged articles should not be marked as reviewed, per consensus here. That's not necessarily to say that the tag is not applicable, this change is just to help stop things from falling through the cracks. Thanks. However, I never intentionally marked this as reviewed - the page curation script did it automatically. To test this, I just tried to request the deletion of a page in the userspace of my test account. The logs here should that I also marked it as reviewed, but the only button I pushed was for deletion. Is this supposed to happen with the page curation script? --DannyS712 (talk) 15:02, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

DannyS712, Yes. it is a bug in the page curation software. There is a phabricator task associated with it, which has not yet been addressed. In future, when PRODing or CSDing articles with the curation software, just click the 'unreview' button afterwards. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 17:21, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@Insertcleverphrasehere: will do. Thanks --DannyS712 (talk) 19:35, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Media Bias/Fact Check

On 19 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Media Bias/Fact Check, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that data from Media Bias/Fact Check was used to train an artificial intelligence machine learning algorithm to identify fake news? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Media Bias/Fact Check. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Media Bias/Fact Check), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Use of rollback

Please can you explain this use of rollback [1] ? Widefox; talk 10:16, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I've responded on the talk page, it was totally accidental. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Rollback is pretty easy to accidentally use as it is one-click action and there are a lot of links on the watchlist. Not sure how it happened, because I don't remember seeing the confirmation message. My best guess is that I accidentally clicked the rollback button just as I refreshed the page (so I didn't even see the confirmation message). If that makes sense. Sorry about the confusion. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 10:22, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

NP, I've used it once in error myself. Widefox; talk 10:43, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec18a}}~~~~ to your friends' talk pages.

ϢereSpielChequers 13:57, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

WereSpielChequers, Christmas with some friends in Dublin this year for me. Thanks for the kind wishes. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 16:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

January 2019 at Women in Red

January 2019, Volume 5, Issue 1, Numbers 104-108 Happy New Year from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. January events: Women of War and Peace Play! January geofocus: Caucasus New, year-long initiative: Suffrage Continuing global initiative: #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list Image attribution: Nevit Dilmen (CC BY-SA 3.0) --Rosiestep (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Happy Holidays!

Best wishes for this holiday season! Thank you for your Wiki contributions in 2018. May 2019 be prosperous and joyful. --K.e.coffman (talk) 23:28, 21 December 2018 (UTC) Noël ~ καλά Χριστούγεννα ~ З Калядамі ~ חנוכה שמח ~ Gott nytt år!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

	Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
	Hi Insertcleverphrasehere, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia,    –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 18:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

​​​Thanks all for the kind wishes. Cheers and happy holidays all, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 21:14, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Season Greetings

Merry Christmas Insertcleverphrasehere


Hi Insertcleverphrasehere, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
May next year be prosperous and joyful.
   –Scopecreep ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 11.02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

• @Scope creep: and you you as well. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 11:33, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

One more sleep

	Happy Holidays!
	Wishing you much joy & happiness now and every year!! Merry Christmas - Happy Hanukkah‼️ When does New Year’s Day come before Christmas Day? Every year! What do you call a bankrupt Santa? Saint Nickel-less. 🔔🎁⛄️🎅🏻 Atsme✍🏻📧 13:19, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

• @Atsme: And to you as well! — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 13:20, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

• From the editors: Where to draw the line in reporting?

• Op-ed: Wikipedia not trumped by Trump appointee

• Special report: The Signpost got 380,000+ views in 2018, sounds reasonable enough, right?

• News and notes: Some wishes do come true

• In the media: Political hijinks

• Discussion report: A new record low for RfA

• WikiProject report: Articlegenesis

• Arbitration report: Year ends with one active case

• Traffic report: Queen dethroned by U.S. presidents

• Gallery: Sun and Moon, water and stone

• Blog: News from the WMF

• Humour: I believe in Bigfoot

• Essay: Requests for medication

• From the archives: Compromised admin accounts – again

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!

Hello Insertcleverphrasehere: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 22:27, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Merry Christmas

Redrose64 🌹 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:30, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Insertcleverphrasehere, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, Chris Troutman (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

NPP by author

Hey,

I'm just attempting to run some analytics on the NPP feed and I seem to remember that someone made a Quarry query to list users and number of articles they have authored which are in the NPP backlog and I want to steal some code from it, do you know where that is?

Many thanks and Merry Christmas,

SITH (talk) 17:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

StraussInTheHouse, I've run a lot of different queries... See my Quarry profile. There might be something there that can help. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 17:19, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

• steals code* :P Many thanks, I've got it. SITH (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Insertcleverphrasehere!

Happy New Year!

Insertcleverphrasehere,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 06:02, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Edit-warring on Media Bias/Fact Check

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Snooganssnoogans, You do realise that you are at 3 reverts in the last 24 hours right? As well as a couple more in the 24 hours before that. I've made 2. There is somewhat of a lack of self awareness in sending me an edit warring warning. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 18:06, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

I found this template in poor taste when it was left but think your post at NPP, while intended in the best of spirits, feels less like a neutral place to solicit input and more a place to canvass support. I'm happy to offer my thinking but would encourage you to reconsider your post. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Barkeep49, Fair enough, I didn't intend it that way, but I see how that can be interpreted. I moved it to the NPOV noticeboard instead, though I really do want some input from NPP due to the fact that the article wasn't ever reviewed and I'd like some input from that angle. I'm a bit sick of this article's conflict and am unwatchlisting it and moving on. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 01:35, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

NPOV Noticeboard is a much better place for it, thanks. I looked into this after you were "warned". I didn't say anything because I found giving you an Edit Warring template poor judgement, but I agreed with the substantive changes Snoog made (this was before Guy got involved). I'll go in more depth at the noticeboard. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:55, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, ICPH!

Happy New Year!

Some celestial fireworks to herald another year of progress for mankind and Wikipedia. All the very best , ICPH,
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:18, 1 January 2019 (UTC)