User talk:Cassianto/Archives/2019/September

A tiny point of information
This is not at all a request for you to change anything but instead an observation about your signature. For what it's worth, I do about 99% of my editing on my Android smartphones, currently Google Pixel XL. On those devices, your signature looks clunky to me and the text is somewhat overwhelmed by the cloudy background. I thought of mentioning your signature to you a few times, but refrained, thinking nothing good would come of it. A couple of weeks ago, I bought a new desktop computer for my small business, with one of those curved "surround vision" screens. Very current. Today, I decided to take a look at Wikipedia on the new computer, and saw your signature. On that device, it looks very elegant and a distinctive font is in high contrast to the cloudy background. It is very nice. So, if anyone ever criticizes your signature, consider their display. Nice signature, by the way. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, thanks for the observation. Yes, I've known for a while that on certain devices my signature looks a little odd. I've seen it on a desktop using Windows 10 and it looks like a blurred, blue line and is quite small in comparison to other signatures used by other people.  I mostly use iOS and it always looks very nice, hence why I've left it. But I must admit, once, I was so annoyed at how the signature looked on larger devices that I did consider changing it back to the standard lettering. But after reading into it, as you've discovered, I figured that it wasn't really my problem to contend with.  I also find that the signature benefits me in long discussions as the darkness of it allows me to whizz down the screen and stop at the point of my section or where I need to amend an edit.    Cassianto Talk  07:44, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That is one of the reasons I like the blue and green in my own signature. Much easier to find in a lengthy discussion. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  15:10, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Michael Horden scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Michael Horden article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 3, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/October 3, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

We also suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  12:20, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019
Hello ,

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.
 * Backlog

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.
 * Coordinator

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for  making  the occasional  mistake while  others can learn from  their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.
 * This month's refresher course

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.
 * Deletion tags

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.
 * Paid editing


 * Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
 * Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent  enhancements to  the New Pages Feed and  features in the Curation  tool, and there are still more to  come. Due to the wealth  of information  now displayed by  ORES, reviewers are strongly  encouraged to  use the system now rather than Twinkle; it  will  also  correctly  populate the logs.
 * Not English
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
 * Tools

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Eric Corbett
If you wish to continue discussing Eric Corbett and his work, you can now freely do so here. Due to the quantity and quality of his work, there will be many times when he and his work needs to be re-evaluated, discussed. I intend this page to remain active as long as Eric’s own page is protected and/ or censored. I shall moderate the page, but other than archiving when necessary I will only remove comments which are abusive or insulting. Anything goes, Eric was an undeniably controversial figure who drew differing opinions, but so long as the language is acceptable and polite, I will let all comments stand. Giano   (talk) 10:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Errors Today's FA
You seem to have decided that there should be no discussion of the idea that "unveiled" is not an appropriate term for the opening of a visitor centre. Please explain what precedents there are for such usage, or what other reason you believe it to be a suitable verb in that context. Kevin McE (talk) 21:59, 20 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Well, there's the fact that it's standard British English as used by sources ranging from BBC news to the Commonwealth War Graves Commission to The Guardian… &#8209; Iridescent 22:07, 20 September 2019 (UTC)


 * All of those were making known the places, not their opening to the public. Kevin McE (talk) 22:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * And seem to have decided you want to ignore the three revert rule. Why do you consider yourself to be above that?   Cassianto Talk  22:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Is that meant to be an answer to the question? Kevin McE (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

EEng
Hello Cassianto,

I have advised EEng to make an effort to stay away from you, and I am also requesting that you make an effort to stay away from him. Also, I am sure you know that the only acceptable place to make an allegation of sockpuppetry is WP:SPI. This encylopedia does not need a lengthy feud between two otherwise productive editors. Thank you for considering my advice. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  17:23, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Noted.  Cassianto Talk  17:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)