User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2019-05

__NOINDEX__

Nomination of Ontario Place station for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ontario Place station is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Ontario Place station until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Joeyconnick (talk) 02:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --WaltCip (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * ... Which is now moot, because the IP who made the original ANI notice was blocked by Bbb23 as a block evader.--WaltCip (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Outing attempt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11:19, 9 May 2019‎ (talk • contribs) 96.45.202.39 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18


Hello ,

, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
 * Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.
 * Reliable Sources for NPP

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.
 * Backlog drive coming soon


 * News
 * Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.


 * Discussions of interest
 * A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
 * There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
 * What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Source issue
What happened with the 92 sources from the List of celebrities who have had an abortion page? P.S.: Many thanks for all of your work on the page. Scribestress (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Did you mean this edit?
 * Some newspapers only keep the last N years online.
 * Some newspapers and other RS sites will do a major reorganization, where, even though they keep their pages online, they break all the old links, because all the pages have new URLs.
 * It used to be these URLS could be lost. However, about a decade ago, some contributors started to use archive sites, the most famous one being the wayback machine (http://archive.org).  I also use http://webcitation.org/archive.php  They are both non-profits, that try to take a snapshot of the appearance of a webpage.  Archive.org archived pages are generally more authentic appearing.  webcitation will sometimes work on pages archive.org doesn't handle.  In theory they assume their non-profit use of the pages qualifies as fair use, and they will remove pages from their archives if the page owner complains.  In theory both sites respect something called a "no-robots" directive.
 * When you click on a page's history one of buttons at the top says "fix dead links". Clicking that button sets a robot to work to try to archive all the references on the page.
 * Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 21:34, 28 May 2019 (UTC)