User talk:Dark-World25

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

CEDU Deletion
Hi, you recently deleted a change i had made on the CEDU page in regards to the experiences of one of the camp goers as you said I did not provide a source yet I was continuing from the source that was provided in the same bullet point a sentence earlier. The sourced sentence has three sentences after detailing the person's experiences but you deleted my sentence of his experience which was from the same source.

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022
Hello , Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to ), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also. Software news: and  have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved. Suggestions:
 * There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
 * Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
 * Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
 * This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog: Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023
Hello , The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day. won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!
 * Backlog
 * 2022 Awards

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from  to  '''

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as and  have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023
Hello , Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by  and  with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of, and also some patches from , has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and on IRC.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

737 MAX Editorializing
Many of the sources listed for the 737 MAX article are factually incorrect in 2024. Please see the current discussion at Talk:Boeing 737 MAX#Major updates needed

Implying that Boeing "expedited development to compete with Airbus" is pure speculation. Much of the US Senate report is unsubstantiated allegations that were proven false or clarified with subsequent investigation and litigation. Crash investigations revealed that the Ethiopian and Indonesian pilots plainly, verifiably did not follow standard procedures that would have allowed them to safely fly the planes.

I appreciate Wikipedia's effort to maintain a neutral tone - which is precisely why I strongly believe that the 737 MAX articles need major updates to remove all instances of editorialization stemming from more sensationalized articles that were published before any actual investigations took place. 2603:6080:5A07:C24C:2826:EC6A:8140:2117 (talk) 14:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Please provide sources demonstrating the erroneous nature of the passage. The sources provided on the talk page does not address the removed content. Dark-World25 (talk) 14:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * This docket from the NTSB disproves the narratives that "Boeing rushed the design" and "didn't tell anyone about MCAS", as well as detailing the extensive testing of MCAS that informed the decision to not require additional pilot training:
 * https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=11369094&FileExtension=pdf&FileName=CERTIFICATION%20SPECIALIST%E2%80%99S%20REPORT-Rel.pdf
 * This document from the NTSB disproves the narrative that "the pilots did everything they could" during the Ethiopian accident:
 * https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/Response%20to%20EAIB%20final%20report.pdf
 * The Deferred Prosecution Agreement from USA v The Boeing Company disproves the narratives that "Boeing never told anyone about MCAS" and "the FAA allowed Boeing to certify itself":
 * https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1351336/download
 * Comments from EASA test pilots disprove the narrative that "the 737 MAX was inherently unstable":
 * https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/newsroom-and-events/press-releases/easa-lays-out-its-proposed-conditions-return-service-boeing-737
 * All of this adds up to a completely different picture than what is currently being painted by the tone across all 737 MAX articles. Readers deserve to understand this complex topic more fully. 2603:6080:5A07:C24C:2826:EC6A:8140:2117 (talk) 14:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * While the report does indicate that MCAS systems were assessed, it does not contradict reports here that it was kept from the pilots, nor does it contradict allegations made here . As it stands, I fail to see how article as is does not concur with the sources that you have linked. Dark-World25 (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It was not "kept from the pilots". That is an assumption of motive, i.e. editorializing.
 * My goal is to simply expand the scope of the 737 MAX articles so that they include all up-to-date information. The information included in the sources I have provided sometimes completely disproves the information that is currently in the articles. This is official information from the NTSB, not just sensational reporting from The Washington Post. Readers deserve the most accurate depiction of events possible. 2603:6080:5A07:C24C:2826:EC6A:8140:2117 (talk) 14:56, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Please concentrate harder…
…and revert your terrible revert here. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I blame huggle for not updating the page. Done Dark-World25 (talk) 14:24, 19 February 2024 (UTC)