User talk:ONUnicorn/archived talk 16
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:ONUnicorn. 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. |
Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Technical news
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
Arbitration
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). - Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
Many thanks
Many thanks for correcting my categorisation error - it is appreciated! Rollo August (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
- No problem! Let me know if you need any more help. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).
|
|
|
Arbitration
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people
, replacing the 1932 cutoff.
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!
Help Draft of article for "Beauty and the Bees"
In October I submitted a draft of an article on the Tasmania-based beauty brand Beauty and the Bees. I haven't heard back (edits, rejection, acceptance, etc.). I made sure everything covered in the article came from a reliable source, and, I think, left out any editorializing. I'd love some feedback. Thank you in advance. Andy M. Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andymsmith (talk • contribs) 19:38, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Andymsmith, I have taken a look at the draft and made some changes. The reason no one has reviewed it is that you did not submit it for review. I added a box with a button that says "Submit the draft for review!" When you are ready for someone to review it, click the button.
- I think it reads a little bit like an advertisement for the products or something the company's public relations department would produce. There is a fine line between an encyclopedic article about a company and an advertisement for that company. It would be a good idea for you to read through some of the articles in Category:FA-Class company articles to get a feel for what Wikipedia is looking for in an article about a company.
- I reformatted your references so that they will number automatically and be clickable. Each reference is named by the last name of the author (execpt the Business Wire one, which did not name an author). When you go to reuse references you can type "<ref name=Author'sLastName />" and that should call back the reference. For new references, before you were putting <sup>1</sup>, just replace the "sup" with "ref" and put the text of the reference where you would have put the number.
- I removed some references entirely, where they did not support the content in the article. For example, you cited a Web MD article about Asperger's, when what was needed was a citation supporting the fact that the company's founder has Asperger's. You cited an article that was just generally telling people what squalane oil is, rather than an article saying Beauty and the Bees uses it and why that is important. I've also tagged some places in the article where you do not have sources supporting information, and need them. I also tagged one reference with a failed verification tag - I think you probably meant to cite a different article from the same magazine.
- Frankly, I think you could cut most of the "Products" section of the article without losing anything - we do not need a comprehensive list of ingredients or background information on the farms where they are grown or the endangered status of the ingredients. If you leave that information you need to make its relevance more clear.
- Lastly, it would be helpful if you had more sources that really talk in depth about the company. The bare minimum for notability is three, and you've got that, but most of the sources in the article either provide background information unrelated to the company (e.g. the one about the farm where the ingredients are grown which does not mention the company at all), or mention the company briefly in an article about something else.
- At this point, I don't think the article would pass an AFC review, but it's reasonably close. Hopefully my comments above are helpful to you. Let me know if you need any more help or want me to take a look at it again later. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:00, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- I've also added some templates to the draft's talk page which may bring it to the attention of people specifically interested in working on articles about companies and/or cosmetics. Also, I see that back in August you mentioned on the help desk that you are a paid part-time employee of the company. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure#How_to_disclose to properly disclose your status as a paid editor. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 22:40, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Global watchlist - Update 8
Updates associated with DannyS712's Global watchlist script and the Global watchlist extension:
As I noted in the last issue, I received a grant from the WMF to develop the global watchlist script into an extension. That extension has now been deployed on Meta. Visit m:Special:GlobalWatchlistSettings to get started.
I do not plan on any further developments being made to the user script. I have released version 9.1.0 to both the dev and stable versions, which includes a notification about the extension being available when you use the user script. You can dismiss the notification, and the script still works, but it will no longer be maintained.
Those interested in providing feedback for the extension should use the phabricator board, phabricator:tag/mediawiki-extensions-globalwatchlist. Any bug reports about the extension should be filed there.
This will likely be the last update sent to this list.
Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 19:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
- A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect. - A request for comment asks if sysops may
place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions
? - There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.
Technical news
- When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
- When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
- There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).
Arbitration
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people.
Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions. - The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed
.
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.
WikiCup 2021 March newsletter
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
Epicgenius led the field with a featured article, nine good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 945 points.
Bloom6132 was close behind with 896 points, largely gained from 71 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
ImaginesTigers, who has been editing Wikipedia for less than a year, was in third place with 711 points, much helped by bringing League of Legends to featured article status, exemplifying how bonus points can boost a contestant's score.
Amakuru came next with 708 points, Kigali being another featured article that scored maximum bonus points.
Ktin, new to the WikiCup, was in fifth place with 523 points, garnered from 15 DYKs and 34 "In the news" items.
The Rambling Man scored 511 points, many from featured article candidate reviews and from football related DYKs.
Gog the Mild, last year's runner-up, came next with 498 points, from a featured article and numerous featured article candidate reviews.
Hog Farm, at 452, scored for a featured article, four good articles and a number of reviews.
Le Panini, another newcomer to the WikiCup, scored 438 for a featured article and three good articles.
Lee Vilenski, last year's champion, scored 332 points, from a featured article and various other sport-related topics.
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Being reasonable
Thank you for giving me a choice. J.Turner99 (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- You're welcome. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
ITN removal error
Hi ONUnicorn, an editor recently removed the Atlanta Spa shooting blurb from the ITN template stating that it was the "oldest item" from the list, but according to this comment [1], the oldest one was actually the 'Pritzker Architecture Prize' blurb. Could the shooting blurb be added back in, please? Thanks! Some1 (talk) 04:03, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
You put this page under the Pending Changes protection on March 12, 2021. There is an IP editor who is now complaining that they are unable to save an edit to the page, see Talk:John Magufuli#Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2021. The protection icon on the page indicates that the page is actually semi-protected. My understanding is that Wikipedia:Pending changes protection should allow unregistered editors to edit the article, although their edits would then need to be reviewed. In this case it would appear that the article has been placed under PC protection and semi-protection simultaneously; at least that's my impression. Could you please check the protection settings there? Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 21:09, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- Nsk92 I placed it under temporary semi protection for 1 month as people were adding unverified rumors about his illness/hospitalization/death (this was before he died). At the same time I also added indef PC protection. The PC shouldn't do anything while semi is active, but once semi expires it stops the article from being completely unprotected if vandalism resumes. Semi should expire April 12. However, now that he actually has died, perhaps the rumors will stop. Would you like me to unprotect it and leave just PC? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 04:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I understand. Yes, please, if you could remove the semi-protection and leave the PC protection in place, that would be preferable, thanks. Nsk92 (talk) 08:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Please share your thoughts on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southgate Shopping Centre (Australia)
Hi User:ONUnicorn (talk) thanks for your contribution to Southgate Shopping Centre (Australia). However Grahame (talk) has made proposed an WP:AFD for that article. Please do a kind gesture and share your thoughts on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southgate Shopping Centre (Australia) whether it should be deleted or kept. - User:BugMenn (talk) 07:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
Administrator changes
Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
Technical news
- When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
Arbitration
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
Question
Do you think I'm good at finding vandalism? Dr Salvus 05:05, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- It looks like you installed RedWarn yesterday, which is a popular vandalism fighting tool. The edits you've made with it since then all look fine. I cannot find any evidence of vandalism fighting before yesterday though, but perhaps I'm missing something? I did see your request to Cassiopeia from last week where you asked to be trained on vandal fighting, and I think Cassiopeia gave you some good advice there. At this point, I would say to go slow and be careful, but you seem to be off to a decent start. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
What do you usually analyze to decide whether or not to entrust rollbacker rights? Dr Salvus 17:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- I look for a long history of counter vandalism work (more than one day). I look at the user's talk page to see if there are complaints about their reverts, and how they respond to those complaints. I look to see if they've received compliments or barnstars for their countervandalism work. I look at their contributions and spot check them to see if I agree that they are reverting obvious vandalism. I look to see if they are distinguishing between vandalism and good faith but problematic edits, as one should not use rollback for the latter. I look to see how they handle being told they have made a mistake - do they take it well or get defensive? Do they spot their own mistakes and correct them? I look to see how (and if) they are communicating with the people whose edits they are reverting. Are they using the warning templates? The warning templates are good for some things, but as they are generic they can be less than informative at times. Are they leaving personalized notes alongside/instead of the warning templates where it is appropriate? There are some cases where it's better not to give excess warnings; do they seem to have a feel for when to warn and when not to warn? Are they checking back to see if their warnings got any response? Have they been posting on AIV and requests for page protection as necessary? How have admins responded to their posts on those boards? Have they requested/expressed a desire for other advanced permissions? Have those been granted? Do they seem excessively eager to get advanced permissions?
- In your case I would not grant rollback without at least one month of solid countervandalism work, and then I would be hesitant. Your recent activity comes across as though you are primarily motivated by awards. Given time and hard work, you can shed that reputation, and counter vandalism work is a good way to broaden yourself as a Wikipedia editor. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:57, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Is it allowed to make mistakes? I have made excellent interventions but every now and then I have been wrong Dr Salvus 22:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Of course it's allowed to make mistakes! You are human, I am human, we are all humans here (except for the bots, and they are programmed by humans), and Errare humanum est. If you want to see some of my mistakes, search my Contributions for the edit summary "oops" or something similar. The question isn't, "do you make mistakes?" It's, "How do you react after you make mistakes?"~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 23:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- When I'm wrong, I admit the mistake and try to improve my interventions Dr Salvus 12:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC
- Good. That's the best approach. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 12:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- When I'm wrong, I admit the mistake and try to improve my interventions Dr Salvus 12:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC
- Of course it's allowed to make mistakes! You are human, I am human, we are all humans here (except for the bots, and they are programmed by humans), and Errare humanum est. If you want to see some of my mistakes, search my Contributions for the edit summary "oops" or something similar. The question isn't, "do you make mistakes?" It's, "How do you react after you make mistakes?"~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 23:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Is it allowed to make mistakes? I have made excellent interventions but every now and then I have been wrong Dr Salvus 22:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I admit that once I asked for rights just to brag, but I changed my approach. How can I make the whole community understand that I am no longer an Hat Collector? Dr Salvus 11:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I hope I'll be able to prove in a month or two that I'm not a hat collector. Let's change the subject, since I'm not a native speaker, do you mind if I ask you to do some copy-edits in the future? Dr Salvus 20:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would enjoy helping you with copy edits. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm glad you accepted.
However, remember that in order to avoid excessively stressing a user I am asking for help from more people by reducing the workload for a single person Dr Salvus 16:43, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Could you copy-edit Mario Noce page? Dr Salvus 20:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Done. I tried to give a lot of explanation in my edit summaries of what I changed and why. I'm a little confused by the "Early career" section. I left a clarify template there explaining what is confusing about it. It's possible someone more familiar with football generally and Italian football in particular may not find that as confusing. I think the article as a whole could use more detail, but it's a good start. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 21:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your copy-edit. Dr Salvus 21:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
"Polispostiva Catania 1980" is a name of a football team for children and not a youth league. Thanks anyway for inserting the "clarification needed" template. Dr Salvus 13:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I would like the article List of Coppa Italia finals to be a readable article even for non-football fans. What do you think of this article? I also wished it was a FL but I made some mistakes that opened a discussion in the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1062#Problemswith GA & FLs|WP:ANI. Dr Salvus 16:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think for the most part List of Coppa Italia finals is fine for what it is. I'm not sure there's really much more you can do with that list article to improve it. The main article on the Coppa Italia seems like it has some significant information gaps, but the list seems fine. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
I would like to know if you have given this rating taking into account the failed FL nominations in which there are many indications that I have not understood since English is my third language Dr Salvus 20:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- There is saying "this list is acceptable" and then there is saying, "this is one of the the best lists on the English Wikipedia". FL is the latter. Some lists, no matter how hard you work on them and how good they are, will never represent the best Wikipedia has to offer, and that's ok. I think List of Coppa Italia finals is fine, it's acceptable. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Now I understand why you gave me this answer. Dr Salvus 21:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
What do you usually take into consideration to assign the right to pending changes reviewer? Dr Salvus 20:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Like with rollback, I look for the ability to distinguish between vandalism and good faith edits, but pending changes reviewer goes beyond mere vandalism. I look for the ability to spot not just obvious vandalism, but subtle vandalism (like small changes in, say, a wrestler's statistics or a film's box office earnings) things that at first appear to be plausible changes but are actually vandalism. Many articles under PC protection are protected for reasons other than vandalism. I look for the ability to identify good faith edits that nevertheless are inappropriate. I look for knowledge about sources, an abililty to evaluate and work with sources, to know what sources are RS or not RS. I hesitate to assign PC reviewer to someone who works mostly or exclusively with the visual editor, as the ability to evaluate the wikicode in the diff is essential. I look for the ability to read the article history and logs - to quickly see why the article has PC protection so they know what to look for. I look for someone who is active and likely has a large watchlist. I look for people who are active on the type of article that is most likely to be PC protected (wrestling articles, film articles, political articles, celebrities - those make up the bulk of the PC queue). I look for people who are able to evaluate changes and sources and articles in subject areas they are unfamiliar with. I look for people who enjoy working their way through a list of tasks that need to be done. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I think I meet these criteria. I can also recognize vandalism in non-soccer topics. But I must to shake off the Hat Collector reputation because I am no longer obsessed with user rights. Dr Salvus 20:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Now I don't ask any more questions, because you have been clear and clear and because I'm not desperate if I'm not a rollbacker (I can use Twinkle). Dr Salvus 12:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Rollback rights
Hello! Yesterday, you have commented on my talk page after you gave me rollback rights. However, it seems like that I still don't have them, (User rights log doesn't show it, nor in the preferences) is this some kind of an error, maybe? Thanks, Vacant0 (talk) 11:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Whoops! Sorry about that. I could have sworn I did it. At any rate, I've done it now. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 01:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hahaha no problem, thank you!! Vacant0 (talk) 10:43, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Request
Hi. Could you undelete Draft:List of Copa del Rey finals? Dr Salvus 20:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Global watchlist - Update 9
Updates associated with DannyS712's Global watchlist script and the Global watchlist extension:
Hi everyone. As I noted in the last issue, I received a grant last year from the WMF to develop the global watchlist script into an extension. That extension has now been deployed on Meta. Visit m:Special:GlobalWatchlistSettings to get started.
That grant has ended, and I have requested another grant to continue development of the extension, and figured subscribers of the newsletter about the user script might be interested. You can see and comment on the grant request at m:Grants:Project/DannyS712/Continued work on GlobalWatchlist extension - if you support this, I hope you'll consider endorsing the request.
Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 00:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for directing me toward the "be bold" page! I have mostly been adding sources and interlinks in my edits, but this makes me feel a lot more comfortable when it comes to potentially making larger changes to pages. I really appreciate the help!
Redf1veXW (talk) 15:22, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Glad I could help. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
WikiCup 2021 May newsletter
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
- The Rambling Man, with 2963 points from three featured articles, 20 featured article reviews, 37 good articles, 73 good article reviews, as well as 22 DYKs.
- Epicgenius, with 1718 points from one featured article, 29 good articles, 16 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
- Bloom6132, with 990 points from 13 DYKs and 64 "In the news" items, mostly recent deaths.
- Hog Farm, with 834 points from two featured articles, five good articles, 14 featured article reviews and 15 good article reviews.
- Gog the Mild, with 524 points from two featured articles and four featured article reviews.
- Lee Vilenski, with 501 points from one featured article, three good articles, six featured article reviews and 25 good article reviews.
Sammi Brie, with 485 points from four good articles, eight good article reviews and 27 DYKs, on US radio and television stations.- Ktin, with 436 points from four good articles, seven DYKs and 11 "In the news" items.
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
- The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.
Technical news
- The user group
oversightwill be renamed tosuppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
- The user group
Arbitration
- The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Four years! |
|---|
Administrators' newsletter – June 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).
Administrator changes
Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless- Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
- Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.
Technical news
- Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.
Arbitration
- After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.
unprotection request
Reggaetón Lento (Bailemos) has had low amounts of vandalism since the PCR, I think recent changes can handle from hereon out and thus I am requesting unprotection. Thanks in advance! (please ping on reply) Sennecaster (What now?) 22:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sennecaster I have unprotected it. Thanks for letting me know you think it no longer needs it. I am concerned though; as one of the reasons I added PC protection was that it has very few page watchers, so vandalism or well-intentioned but poor quality edits can linger in a situation like that. It might be a good idea to keep an eye on it and add it to your watchlist if it isn't already there. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Sunshine
|
Sunshine! | |
| Hello ONUnicorn! Interstellarity (talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst:User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity (talk) 20:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC) |
Happy first day of summer, ONUnicorn!! Interstellarity (talk) 20:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Same to you! ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Bettina Walter
Hello ONUnicorn, I'd like to ask whether you could unprotect Bettina Walter which you protected from creation a couple of years ago. I've reviewed a draft for this person at AfC (Draft:Bettina Walter) and I believe she is now notable under WP:ANYBIO. Thank you and best, Modussiccandi (talk) 10:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- Modussiccandi Done. The draft looks like a vast improvement over the repeatedly deleted and recreated version. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
WikiCup 2021 July newsletter
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
- The Rambling Man, with 1825 points from 3 featured articles, 44 featured article reviews, 14 good articles, 30 good article reviews and 10 DYKs. In addition, he completed a 34-article good topic on the EFL Championship play-offs.
- Epicgenius, a New York specialist, with 1083 points from 2 featured article reviews, 18 good articles, 30 DYKs and plenty of bonus points.
- Bloom6132, with 869 points from 11 DYKs, all with bonus points, and 54 "In the news" items, mostly covering people who had recently died.
- Gog the Mild, with 817 points from 3 featured articles on historic battles in Europe, 5 featured article reviews and 3 good articles.
- Hog Farm, with 659 points from 2 featured articles and 2 good articles on American Civil War battles, 18 featured article reviews, 2 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 4 DYKs.
BennyOnTheLoose, a snooker specialist and new to the Cup, with 647 points from a featured article, 2 featured article reviews, 6 good articles, 6 good article reviews and 3 DYKs.
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
- An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
Technical news
- IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
Arbitration
- The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.
Technical news
- Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)
Arbitration
- Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.
Miscellaneous
- You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.
WikiCup 2021 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, 
The Rambling Man and 
Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being 
Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are .svg){kind=small}
Gog the Mild, 
Lee Vilenski, 
BennyOnTheLoose, 
Amakuru and 
Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. .jpg){kind=small}
Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
Technical news
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
Your help desk response
I am slow getting through the archives, but I thought you might want to correct your response. For some reason you are referring to a question two sections above, when it is actually the next section above.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Which help desk response are you referring to? I'm confused. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Oops. I copied it and then forgot. This response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, that one. There was a section between those two, but it got removed after my post. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 00:52, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Just in case anyone reads that question, it would be nice to correct it so it refers to the right section.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- How's this? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- That's more complicated than what I generally do, but it gets the job done. I usually mark out the inaccurate information and replace it with what is correct. But that's changing other people's work, and I should ask them to do it themselves.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:57, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- How's this? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Just in case anyone reads that question, it would be nice to correct it so it refers to the right section.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ONUnicorn,
Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.
Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.
At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.
There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.
Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Greetings!
The AfroCine Project core team is happy to inform you that the Months of African Cinema Contest is happening again this year in October and November. We invite Wikipedians all over the world to join in improving content related to African cinema on Wikipedia!
Please list your username under the participants’ section of the contest page to indicate your interest in participating in this contest. The term "African" in the context of this contest, includes people of African descent from all over the world, which includes the diaspora and the Caribbean.
The following prizes would be recognized at the end of the contest:
- Overall winner
- 1st - $500
- 2nd - $200
- 3rd - $100
- Diversity winner - $100
- Gender-gap fillers - $100
- Language Winners - up to $100*
Also look out for local prizes from affiliates in your countries or communities! For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. We look forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:20, 30th September 2021 (UTC)
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Administrators' newsletter – October 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
- Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
Technical news
- DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.
Arbitration
- A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
- Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
- The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
Miscellaneous
- Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
- The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
November 2021 backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
Administrators' newsletter – November 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Technical news
- Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.
Arbitration
- GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
- Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.
WikiCup 2021 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:
- The Rambling Man (submissions) with 5072 points
- Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 3276 points
- Amakuru (submissions) with 3197 points
- Epicgenius (submissions) with 1611 points
- Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1571 points
- BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 1420 points
- Hog Farm (submissions) with 1043 points
- Bloom6132 (submissions) with 528 points
All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
- The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for 8 FAs in round 5.
- Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured list prize, for 3 FLs in round 5.
- Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured topic prize, for 13 articles in a featured topic in round 5.
- Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 63 GAs in round 4.
- The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good topic prize, for 86 articles in good topics in round 5.
- The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the reviewer prize, for 68 FAC reviews and 213 GAN reviews, both in round 5.
- Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 30 did you know articles in round 3 and 105 overall.
- Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 71 in the news articles in round 1 and 284 overall.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
Greetings,
It is already past the middle of the contest and we are really excited about the Months of African Contest 2021 achievements so far! We want to extend our sincere gratitude for the time and energy you have invested. If you have not yet participated in the contest, it is not too late to do it. Please list your username as a participant on the contest’s main page.
Please remember to list the articles you have improved or created on the article achievements' section of the contest page so they can be tracked. In order to win prizes, be sure to also list your article in the users by articles. Please note that your articles must be present in both the article achievement section on the main contest page, as well as on the Users By Articles page for you to qualify for a prize.
We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
- Overall winner
- 1st - $500
- 2nd - $200
- 3rd - $100
- Diversity winner - $100
- Gender-gap filler - $100
- Language Winners - up to $100*
Thank you once again for your valued participation! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
Administrators' newsletter – December 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
Administrator changes
Technical news
- Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
- The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
- The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.
Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Holiday greetings (2021)
ONUnicorn,
I sincerely hope your holiday season goes well this year especially with what we went through last year. I'm optimistic that 2022 will be a better year for all of us: both in real life and on Wikipedia. Wishing you the best from, Interstellarity (talk) 18:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you. I wish you a happy holiday season and a better 2022 too! ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 00:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.
- Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.
Arbitration
- Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.
Miscellaneous
- The functionaries email list (functionaries-en
lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
How we will see unregistered users
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. /Johan (WMF)
18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the 2022 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.
Technical news
- The user group
oversightwill be renamedsuppressin around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections. - The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.
- The user group
Arbitration
- Community input is requested on several motions aimed at addressing discretionary sanctions that are no longer needed or overly broad.
- The Arbitration Committee has published a generalised comment regarding successful appeals of sanctions that it can review (such as checkuser blocks).
- A motion related to the Antisemitism in Poland case was passed following a declined case request.
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2022 Steward elections will begin on 07 February 2022, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2022, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Voting in the 2022 Community Wishlist Survey is open until 11 February 2022.
USer you just blocked
Hey ONU! Just so you know, the user you just blocked is an LTA. If you'd like I can show you the previous times I've reported them. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:50, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- I saw you tagged it as such on AIV. Running their contributions through google translate also indicates such as they are specifically attacking other users. If you want to show me the previous reports, that's fine.~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving
- [2] is the most recent one besides the one I reported today. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Request
Hi @ONUnicorn:, I personally requested you to delete this page Ahmedabad Titans in 2022. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 16:23, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Done for that one. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
My apologies on that. I missed MrsSnoozyTurtle's earlier G11 request. Onel5969 TT me 19:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- No problem, it's easy to miss things in the edit history. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:42, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A RfC is open to change the wording of revision deletion criterion 1 to remove the sentence relating to non-infringing contributions.
- A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.
Technical news
- The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (T296645)
- Special:Nuke will now allow the selection of standard deletion reasons to be used when mass-deleting pages. This was a Community Wishlist Survey request from 2022. (T25020)
- The ability to undelete the talk page when undeleting a page using Special:Undelete or the API will be added soon. This change was requested in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. (T295389)
Arbitration
- Several unused discretionary sanctions and article probation remedies have been rescinded. This follows the community feedback from the 2021 Discretionary Sanctions review.
Miscellaneous
- The 2022 appointees for the Ombuds commission are Érico, Faendalimas, Galahad, Infinite0694, Mykola7, Olugold, Udehb and Zabe as regular members and Ameisenigel and JJMC89 as advisory members.
- Following the 2022 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AntiCompositeNumber, BRPever, Hasley, TheresNoTime, and Vermont.
- The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey results have been published alongside the ranking of prioritized proposals.
WikiCup 2022 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
- Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.- Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.
These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
WikiCup 2022 March newsletter
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
- Epicgenius, a finalist last year, who led the field with 1906 points, gained from 32 GAs and 19 DYKs, all on the topic of New York buildings.
- AryKun, new to the contest, was second with 1588 points, having achieved 2 FAs, 11 GAs and various other submissions, mostly on the subject of birds.
- Bloom6132, a WikiCup veteran, was in third place with 682 points, garnered from 51 In the news items and several DYKs.
- GhostRiver was close behind with 679 points, gained from achieving 12 GAs, mostly on ice hockey players, and 35 GARs.
- Kavyansh.Singh was in fifth place with 551 points, with an FA, a FL, and many reviews.
- SounderBruce was next with 454 points, gained from an FA and various other submissions, mostly on United States highways.
- Ktin, another WikiCup veteran, was in seventh place with 412 points, mostly gained from In the news items.
These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
My Thoughts ...
yeah Onunicorn... Wikipedia is always a Russian.Ukainian War ... Antonov Airlines again the same ... Since a while about all those Fights in the way of thinking... told myself many times to leave Wiki. But sure was stubborn still trying to do with my vaste knowledge and research to improve the best text, layout and comprehension, updated, essential, the only necessary to the right direct points and easy... however this does not work. Wiki System is so... So there is no and will never be a solution. I sure am weak, because even replacing Ips 1000 million times, escaping the threat Blocks, Bans and other Administrators Tools Imposing Minds ... the hit in knives points do not bring entertainment and hobby anymore. Prefer doing my own way in 'my' Facebooks groups or my art in Artstation and left the Wikipedian destroyed and abandoned.. If still makes you fun, then keep your way. Regards MK--188.96.90.63 (talk) 15:27, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you think the way Wikipedia works is frustrating. I understand you are trying to update information that is outdated because of the war. However, Wikipedia requires citations to previously published sources. Another problem is that some of your changes are confusing. For example, "Most was not remained useful" just doesn't make sense. That's why I suggested you use the talk page, to try to make yourself understood and discuss what you think needs to be changed with other editors, so that they don't revert and threaten you. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- ok, yes, Wikipedia way is a bad system.. Most complain of the international english, but if you know the aircraft and history, it is clear most of parts of them are not useful anymore. This is clear. And sincere it is all good sourced... But after all, after 10 times wanting to leave ... the best is to let Wiki for past... It has other better information sources. It could be a good reference but it is an extreme unfair system. Having 100 % administration in other my places is much better fun, entertainment, education, learn, info source and useful for myself, this Wikipedia proves day by day is nothing for a good future. It is not an encyclopedia made by profissionals, it is a club of administrators competing... Regards and Bye .. The talk pages, except some few theme, it is a place is ever ignored, no one goes see there and discuss, this is utopia. --188.96.90.63 (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.
Technical news
- Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the
deletelogentryanddeletedhistoryrights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928) - When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)
Arbitration
- Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
- A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
- A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.
Miscellaneous
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.
Hello, I want to create this page but the existing draft was created by blocked account that's why I am requesting to delete the existing draft so I can start the new draft for "Mahmoud Refaat". Kindly also brief me that is it good to update the existing draft or its better to create the new one because the existing one was created by block account. Thank You Casiehunter (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Casiehunter I would just edit the existing draft. It has previously been deleted and was restored on December 10, 2021 in case there were any useful sources in the history. The draft as it exists now is very short, only 2 sentences that, the way Wikipedia used to work, would have been considered just fine for a stub. Moreover, WP:G5 only applies to pages created in violation of a ban or block - it doesn't apply to pages created before the person was blocked. So just use the existing draft as a launch pad and go from there. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- All that said, I see this edit to my talk page is your first edit. Welcome to Wikipedia. I will caution you that writing an article is not an easy task, and I would encourage you to get your feet wet in some other areas before jumping head first into article creation. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
New administrator activity requirement
The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
- Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
- Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you
I just wanted to say thank you for at least being kind to me on ANI and phrasing any criticism in a constructive way. I know there are things that I could do better, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask to at least be treated as a person with emotions by others on here. I appreciate you giving me the benefit of the doubt instead of blowing me off. Clemkr (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I think a lot of people around here could work on giving criticism in constructive ways. However, the internet is not a great vehicle for conveying nuance. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:55, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
"The DA" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The DA and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 22#The DA until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 12:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the head's up. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:42, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
LHR - Thank you!
I appreciate your kind and balanced judgement concerning that Draft:LH_Research ANI-discussion. Though I do not completely understand the lack of WP:GNG, I improved on the article massively, perhaps even more than would it have been accepted immediately to mainspace. So the very strict rules had a positive impact on me nontheless; and in the end, a better article resulted. Best, Geoman3 (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I'm glad it ultimately resulted in a better article. Hopefully the latest version will be accepted. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
WikiCup 2022 May newsletter
The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.
Our top scorers in round 2 were:
- Epicgenius, with 1264 points from 2 featured article, 4 good articles and 18 DYKs. Epicgenius was a finalist last year but has now withdrawn from the contest as he pursues a new career path.
- AryKun, with 1172 points from two featured articles, one good article and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews.
- Bloom6132, with 605 points from 44 in the news items and 4 DYKs.
Sammi Brie, with 573 points from 8 GAs and 21 DYKs.
Ealdgyth, with 567 points from 11 GAs and 34 good and featured article reviews.- Panini!, with 549 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and several other sources.
- Lee Vilenski, with 545 points from 1 FA, 4 GAs and a number of reviews.
The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Stopping By to Thank!
Hi, Just stopping by to thank and introduce myself.
I see a change was made to my first draft article - I am pretty much as new as a new person could be so I don't really know what was amended or how to tell, but whatever it was I'm sure it was to improve the Wikipedia experience, so thank you.
I hope to keep up-to-date on the Teahouse and other resources available to learn as much as possible.
Thanks again - your user page seems quite extensive and a reflection of your experience, so I hope to learn much from admins like you and others.
Cheers! TheRealInternational (talk) 05:52, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Update: I found out how to view the changes (improvements) you made. Again, super newbie here, but just the process of 'poking-around' and referring to the helpful resources is incredible. Thanks & Cheers! TheRealInternational (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @TheRealInternational I'm glad you are figuring things out. If you have any questions or need any assistance, feel free to ask me (or just about anyone, really).
- By attempting to write a new article from scratch you've jumped right into one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. By attempting to write about a living person running for political office, you've really jumped into a minefield. You should very carefully read and understand the general notability guidelines, and the supplement on politicians. One area where articles about candidates for political office often fall short, is if all of the coverage of them is in the context of their campaign. If that is the case then they fall afoul of WP:BLP1E. It looks like Mav is bordering on that.
- That said, you can feel free to work on the draft in draftspace. So long as it is actively being edited, and does not meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion, it's not in imminent danger. Drafts get automatically deleted if they go 6 months without being edited, but they can also be restored on request if they are deleted for that reason. Once you are sure it's ready for mainspace, click the blue button that says "submit the draft for review" and someone will come by eventually to either accept it or tell you what still needs to change with it. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:11, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
- Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.
Technical news
- The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
- A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.
Arbitration
- Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.
DYK for Fantasy cartography
Hi ONUnicorn, I have a DYK nomination for the article fantasy cartography and I don't know where it is or what I must do to find it. I've tried to do another one for the same article but it denies me because the first one is floating somewhere. Would you be able to point me in the right direction?
Also, I'm looking for some help getting it reviewed - I've been doing some serious edits on it in the last month. Any help in that direction would be great!
Kind regards,--Twomatters (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Twomatters it can be found at Template:Did you know nominations/Fantasy cartography. I found it by clicking "What links here" (in the left sidebar in desktop view, or in the 3 dot drop down in mobile view) at fantasy cartography. It was nominated on the 14th of May, and it is properly transcluded in the list of nominations, so it should be reviewed in due time. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 12:24, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also, it's generally not good practice to copy-paste the same comment on multiple users' talk pages. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- By the way, the improvement you have made to that article so far is dramatic. Good job! ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:10, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also, it's generally not good practice to copy-paste the same comment on multiple users' talk pages. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for all this ONUnicorn!! Twomatters (talk) 00:35, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello ONUnicorn,
At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.
Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.
In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 808 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 850 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.
This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
| | |
| Five years! |
|---|