User talk:PK650/Archives/2022/June
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:PK650. 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. |
June events from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Request on 16:16:22, 1 June 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Julie Bif
Julie Bif (talk) 16:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Julie Bif: Is there anything I can do for you? PK650 (talk) 10:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi! I have been trying to submit Graham Guest for a while now. I keep getting the same "not notable" feedback. He is very adamant about wanting a page. Any advice on what I can do? He mentioned Biography of a Living Person. Do you think if I shortened his page as is now, it would be allowed then?
- Thank you so much for your help! Julie Bif (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Julie Bif: Hi again. Thank you for contacting me. Unfortunately I concur with most of what's been stated in the comments on the draft page. The subject of the article doesn't appear to meet any of the notability criteria on Wikipedia. You might at this point want to try out any of the other free to publish biography sites online. PK650 (talk) 22:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your input. I was looking at EverybodyWiki. Thought on this? Julie Bif (talk) 23:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's a thought! All the best, PK650 (talk) 07:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your input. I was looking at EverybodyWiki. Thought on this? Julie Bif (talk) 23:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Julie Bif: Hi again. Thank you for contacting me. Unfortunately I concur with most of what's been stated in the comments on the draft page. The subject of the article doesn't appear to meet any of the notability criteria on Wikipedia. You might at this point want to try out any of the other free to publish biography sites online. PK650 (talk) 22:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Wiki page The Mains
Hi, Would you please reconsider my wikipedia page i made? This was a finals project and if it doesn’t get accepted i fail this class. The Mains have a large following and are relevant. I just need the page to be online until the end of this month. I put a lot of work into this and if you go look at their TikTok you can see that they are influencers. I would really appreciate it. 2A02:1811:8C01:DF00:C964:161F:AA90:A639 (talk) 23:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. Thank you for reaching out, but unfortunately this is not how Wikipedia works and if your tutor actually said that, you have good cause to head over to the Wikipedia:Education noticeboard and leave a post about it. Being popular on TikTok is not a valid notability criterion; we rely on significant coverage in independent and reliable sources, whereas a few local snippets about a somewhat populat video do not make the group automatically notable per the general notability guideline. This page may be of help regarding expectations while editing Wikipedia as part of an assignment. Regards, PK650 (talk) 23:58, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Icertis
Would you consider refactoring your comments at Talk:Icertis, or maybe we could spend some time here on your talk page working out what appears to be a major misunderstanding of what I've written? --Hipal (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Hipal, thank you for getting in touch. I apologize for being a bit too gung ho earlier. From my perspective I would be keen to constructively participate in moving the article forwards. After all, tags are not meant as punishment but as prompts for improvement. PK650 (talk) 02:04, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't believe anyone is using it as punishment, so why bring it up? Doing so doesn't move us forward. --Hipal (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not you specifically, sorry if it came across that way! But it's something I've occasionally experienced as an NPP, COI and AfC reviewer especially. I firmly believe in fomenting good editing behavior, and there have been instances where articles have been tagged as COI even though they went through proper channels (e.g. edit requests or AfC) simply because of that editor declaring their conflict, which is something they should in fact do per the TOS! That's neither here nor there in any case. My main message at present was to be proactive and let the appropriate editors know what they should be doing in terms of copy editing and improving content in order to advance Wikipedia's interests. Thanks again for engaging, PK650 (talk) 11:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- You brought it up. I don't know why you did. It appears to undermine your stated goals. --Hipal (talk) 16:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not you specifically, sorry if it came across that way! But it's something I've occasionally experienced as an NPP, COI and AfC reviewer especially. I firmly believe in fomenting good editing behavior, and there have been instances where articles have been tagged as COI even though they went through proper channels (e.g. edit requests or AfC) simply because of that editor declaring their conflict, which is something they should in fact do per the TOS! That's neither here nor there in any case. My main message at present was to be proactive and let the appropriate editors know what they should be doing in terms of copy editing and improving content in order to advance Wikipedia's interests. Thanks again for engaging, PK650 (talk) 11:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't believe anyone is using it as punishment, so why bring it up? Doing so doesn't move us forward. --Hipal (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Ion District
Hello! I wanted to thank you again for your assistance at Talk:Ion Innovation District. I've submitted a request to improve the History section based on secondary coverage, if you're willing to take a look at what I've proposed. Much appreciated! KB Ion (talk) 19:41, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello PK650/Archives/2022,
- Backlog status
At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.
Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]
In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).
While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).
- Backlog drive
A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. 
Barnstars will be awarded.
- TIP – New school articles
Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
- Misc
There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 12919 articles, as of 06:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot
There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.
- Reminders
- Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
- If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, 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.
- Notes
Viagogo requests
Thanks so much for taking the time to go through and consider my requests on Viagogo. About the last one, I certainly understand there is a hierarchy of sources. In this case I think I might be oblivious to some underlying style guideline, however, since I do quite often see home websites used on the Wikipedia pages of those companies, at least for simple numbers and statements of fact. I also went through the link they push about the types of references - I think the guideline here applies to corporations, unless that is only for biographies and I'm understanding incorrectly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published_and_questionable_sources_as_sources_on_themselves Alex.SHVGG (talk) 01:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- Alex.SHVGG Hi. Your guideline interpretation is sound, and I've added the paragraph in question except for the last sentence. I couldn't find the latter on the page provided, but I did find what I then wrote in quotations (which is comparable to your requested phrasing). PK650 (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red in July 2022
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging