User talk:J947/Archive 2

Speedy deletion nomination of Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams


A tag has been placed on Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.nca.gr.jp/jws2008/OS2-firstsc.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * , the history looks a bit confused but I think the above notice should go to .  Schwede 66  00:48, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry but the page was tagged as copyvio before Shrekts performed any edits. The material you used to create the article was copied from https://www.first.org/about. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't create this!  J 947 (c)  19:44, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

13:58:01, 9 April 2017 review of submission by Bfistein
Hi there, Just edited the sources in the above article. I added several objective third-party articles and removed the Wikipedia reference. However, the reflist is not refreshing for some reason. Hopefully this will make the sources more reliable.

Optional RfA candidate poll rating
Just wanted to let you know that the bug where your new poll comments went up to the top of the page just got fixed - sorry for missing that :) Enterprisey (talk!) 20:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks; a 'preview' option would be great (and perhaps a bigger text field as well).  J 947 (c)  20:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Relisting problems(2)...
When you are relisting an AfD nomination, please remember to remove the nomination from the original log per WP:RELIST.All the AFD-s you relisted today suffer from the same error.Cheers! Winged Blades Godric 16:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

A better version
Consider using this version. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay.  J 947 (c)  22:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Aside, you put back some items. Doesn't the full stop mean they didn't pass afd vetting? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:06, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, but those candidates haven't be evaluated on other standards so they can look at their goals.  J 947 (c)  03:18, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Do you mean the table is there to show the users what they need to be vetted completely and take the poll? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Relisting
Hi,

I just wanted to ask you about your AfD relisting method. I noticed that you managed to relist something like thirty discussions in five minutes this afternoon, seemingly indiscriminately, so I was just wondering how you normally arrive at the decision to relist any given debate. In particular, uncontested nominations with no comments or only comments endorsing the nominator's proposed action should usually be left to admins, since we have a mandate to treat these like expired PRODs and close them as "soft delete". This is even more pertinent if the debate has been relisted with no additional comments. A few examples here, here, here, and here. There's a good chance these entries could have all been closed instead of clogging up another day's log for the next week. I'm also seeing some more lengthy discussions mixed in, like these two, which might be difficult to properly assess at a rate of 8 per minute. Any light you can shed on the matter would be appreciated. Regards, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm first addressing the soft deletion point you made. I knew about the recent policy when I started AfD closing/relisting back in March. At first I didn't relist the soft delete-eligible ones even though others (e.g. and, who are both admins) did. Then I started doing it. Note: I do examine arguments, though minimally, and the reason I'm so quick at it is that I use User:Evad37/XfDcloser. I'll come to your other points later.  J  947 (c)  01:55, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response. Kurykh and Northamerica are both admins, so it's up to their discretion whether to enact soft deletions. There are some cases where NAC relists of SOFTDELETE-eligible nominations are appropriate, but I think in general it might be a good idea to leave those sorts of AfDs to admins. That way, at least we'll still have the soft deleting option, even if we decide not to use it. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I haven't seen a single case when either of them have enacted SOFTDELETE.  J 947 (c)  02:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * But again, that's their choice to make as reviewing admins. Many admins – I'd say most – do, sometimes, opt for soft deletion where appropriate. If non-admins relist all low- or no-participation nominations immediately after seven days are up, then admins no longer have the choice and the whole no quorum policy is obsolete. See what I mean? –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC has clarified that user categories should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
 * Discussions are ongoing regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included clarification that adding a link on a Wikipedia forum to a job posting is not a violation of the harassment policy.

Technical news
 * You can now see a list of all autoblocks at Special:AutoblockList.
 * There is a new tool for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict other user's ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
 * Administrators, bureaucrats and stewards can now set an expiry date when granting user rights. (discuss, permalink)

Miscellaneous
 * Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Doglan


A tag has been placed on Doglan, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. WNYY98 (talk) 08:13, 20 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: I just moved it to draft and am not the actual creator of it.  J 947 (c)  18:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

01:46:06, 21 May 2017 review of submission by 47.185.93.163
I believe this actress has proven herself to be of notability based on her online presence and official cast announcements from notable companies. She has also proven to be of high demand in the convention scene. In addition, Morgan has noteworthy roles in many popular anime, video game and movie titles associated with notable companies such as Funimation, Hi-Rez Studios, ScrewAttack and GalaxyTrail     I believe this should also be taken into consideration. She is in big enough titles to be of notability, despite her only being in the industry since 2015. Thank you for your time.


 * Sorry, but none of those sources are considered to be reliable.  J 947 (c)  18:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you
Dear J947, Many thanks for your kind comments and endorsement of my proposal at Village pump (Proposals). I am well aware that as this proposal is still in its infancy, we shall just have to see what happens in the face of what other Wikipedians might say. Once again, thank you for your comments. Vorbee (talk) 19:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for telling this to me. Much appreciated.  J  947 (c)  19:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

(with namespace 0)
What is "(with namespace 0)" ? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:02, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Namespace 0 is the main (article) namespace. You just need to replace it in the url from '?namespace=4' to '?namespace=0'.  J 947(c) (m) 03:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what all that means, and I am pretty sure many visitors to that page won't either. :) Maybe we ought to just go with simple terms. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, of course. I am not sure how to phrase it, though.  J 947(c) (m) 03:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Me neither. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:21, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

A future administrator
You have all the hallmarks of a future admin. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , just my thoughts. J947, get a couple of years under your belt first, though; that seems to be the time that many consider as necessary before this becomes an acceptable step.  Schwede 66  19:20, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Use those couple of years to do what the advice pages say, and I think you'll become a dandy admin. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kutra Unarvu


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Kutra Unarvu requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Seraphim System ( talk ) 19:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Not me.  J 947(c) (m) 19:57, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
 * Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
 * An RfC regarding the bot policy has closed with changes to the section describing restrictions on cosmetic changes.

Technical news
 * Users will soon be able to blacklist specific users from sending them notifications.

Miscellaneous
 * Following the 2017 elections, the new members of the Board of Trustees include Raystorm, Pundit and Doc James. They will serve three-year terms.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Happyme22 • Dragons flight
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Zad68

Guideline and policy news
 * The RFC discussion regarding WP:OUTING and WMF essay about paid editing and outing (see more at the ArbCom noticeboard archives) is now archived. Milieus #3 and #4 received support; so did concrete proposal #1.

Technical news
 * Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
 * A new bot will automatically revision delete unused file versions from files in Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old.

Miscellaneous
 * A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
 * A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
 * Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve Pondok Ranji railway station
Hi, I'm Boleyn. J947, thanks for creating Pondok Ranji railway station!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 20:40, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * , the above note needs to be posted at . I have had a look at the history as J947 wouldn't create unreferenced articles.  Schwede 66  03:54, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a series of discussions around new pages patrol, the WMF is helping implement a controlled autoconfirmed article creation trial as a research experiment, similar to the one proposed in 2011. You can learn more about the research plan at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial. The exact start date of the experiment has yet to be determined.
 * A new speedy deletion criterion, regarding articles created as a result undisclosed paid editing, is currently being discussed (permalink).
 * An RfC (permalink) is currently open that proposes expanding WP:G13 to include all drafts, even if they weren't submitted through Articles for Creation.

Technical news
 * LoginNotify should soon be deployed to the English Wikipedia. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
 * The new version of XTools is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes administrator statistics, an improved edit counter, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on Phabricator and provide general feedback at mw:Talk:XTools.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 August 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Relistings
Hi, I noticed you relisted Articles for deletion/Spindrift (company) a second time, despite the fact that it had no opposition to deletion, and that you had recently done this on other AfDs as well. I'd like to echo 's earlier comments. WP:NOQUORUM was relatively recently updated to make it more clear that SOFTDELETE by an admin was an acceptable outcome. 's essay WP:Relist bias also makes some very good points here. Relisting AfDs a second time should normally only rarely be done, especially when there are viable other outcomes to the discussion. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:03, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Not to pile on, but I'd like to say something a bit stronger than . The updates to WP:NOQUORUM that I championed make clear that evaluating an uncontested AfD nomination as a PROD is expected, with exceptions only acceptable when an administrator believes the AfD is likely controversial (or for a few other narrow situations). Because the expected outcome is deletion, it is not appropriate for non-admins to relist these, which is one of the reasons the guideline explicitly mentions administrators rather than closers. I'm a huge advocate for non-admins helping out everywhere they can, but please leave the possibly-delete outcomes at AfD to an admin, mostly for the reasons I state at WP:Relist bias. You may find that you can contribute more productively as a closer at WP:TFD (where non-admins can close as delete in all cases) or WP:CFD (where non-admins can close as delete so long as they can carry out the removal of categories from pages; see WP:AWB for the likely method of doing this and feel free to email me for copies of the AWB scripts I used at one time when I closed CfDs). If you need help getting started at either process, feel free to let me know; I'd be happy to direct your towards good resources or assist you in any way I can. WP:ANRFC can always use non-admin closers as well. ~ Rob 13 Talk 21:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You should also message about this as he also did controversial relistings (to some extent worse than me because he relists AfDs with a !vote apart from a nom the first time). Also, the outcome would practically always be the same, as other regular participants will just do the same thing.  J 947(c) (m)  01:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Regarding relists, I usually relist if there is only one !vote aside from the nom, usually unless it has been already relisted. I don't consider one !vote to be consensus. WP:RELIST says "However, if at the end of the initial seven-day period, the discussion has only a few participants (including the nominator), and/or it seems to be lacking arguments based on policy, it may be appropriate for the closer to relist it, to solicit further discussion to determine consensus." — MRD 2014  Talk • Edits • Help! 01:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Then you should also read the revamped WP:NOQUORUM,, which makes clear that you should not make such a relist when there is no-one opposing deletion in almost all cases. Also, see note #2 in WP:RELIST, which references NOQUORUM. ~ Rob 13 Talk 02:15, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * he nomination statement  counts as one delete vote (that's why the article is at  AfD in  the first  place. It  would take at least  two  clearly  policy/guideline compliant  'keep' votes to close as 'keep'. This does not  inclued 'I like it' votes which  usually  come from  the article creator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:25, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I have read it and will take that into consideration when relisting future AfD discussions. Should a discussion be closed if there are no !votes and it hasn't been relisted, assuming it hadn't been PRODed in the past? — MRD 2014  Talk • Edits • Help! 02:28, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The short answer is "Usually, yes". The long answer is "It depends". It definitely should be treated as a PROD. Almost always, this means soft deletion (where anyone can request restoration at WP:REFUND). Sometimes, this means relisting after doing some WP:BEFORE research (or !voting) because the topic appears notable. Sometimes, it means relisting because the argument given by the nom is patently awful (e.g. comprised only of arguments to avoid, etc). These are rare exceptions rather than the norm, though. Because deletion is solidly on the table, these decisions should be made by admins. `~ Rob 13 Talk 02:34, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. — MRD 2014  Talk • Edits • Help! 02:39, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Non-admin closure of controversial topic
Hello, J947. I see that yesterday you made a non-administrative closing of WP:Articles for deletion/Sumana Secondary School. But the guidance for non-administrative closings (WP:NAC) tells us that they should be done only "absent any contentious debate" (see item 1 under "Appropriate closures"). This guidance is repeated at item 2 of "Inappropriate closures" and again at item 1 of "Pitfalls to avoid". Would you please explain why you thought it appropriate to make a non-admin closing of this discussion, given that there certainly was debate over the applicability of pre-RfC consensus? I look forward to hearing your response. NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:29, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I've reverted this close because it does not appear to weigh the arguments based on policies and guidelines, as required when determining consensus. You can see my relisting statement for more detail. ~ Rob 13 Talk 02:34, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you mean 'secondary schools are not presumed notable automatically instead of 'secondary schools are not presumed notable'?  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>'(c) (m) 03:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I meant what I said. They are not presumed notable. That's not to say they're presumed not notable, which would be quite different. They just don't have any presumption of notability such as NFL players do (see WP:NGRIDIRON). There's no policy or guideline which states that "this is a secondary school" is an argument for keeping an article. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 04:08, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Which is precisely what I was trying to say in my rebuttals to the !keeps, with a link to the exact same RfC BU Rob13 cited in his relisting comment. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 04:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

NAC closure
Hi. When closing as 'redirect', please remember to include the appropriate redirect  template so  that  the respective categories are updated. See this example. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:20, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll remember that.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 03:00, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi J947. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AJ947 enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Mz7 (talk) 08:15, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.
 * Thanks for the prompt response!  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m)  04:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Nakon • Scott
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news
 * ACTRIAL, a research experiment that restricts article creation to autoconfirmed users, will begin on September 7. It will run for six months. You can learn more about the research specifics at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial, while Wikipedia talk:Autoconfirmed article creation trial is probably the best venue for general discussion.
 * Following an RfC, WP:G13 speedy deletion criterion now applies to any page in the draftspace that has not been edited in six months. There is a bot-generated report, updated daily, to help identify potentially qualifying drafts that have not been submitted through articles for creation.

Technical news
 * You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
 * Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
 * In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration
 * Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kaushal dimri


A tag has been placed on Kaushal dimri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. — <span style="font-family: monospace, monospace;">usernamekiran (talk)  04:01, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Not me.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 04:03, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

12:57:39, 6 September 2017 review of submission by Bws7
The individual who is the subject of this article was the first African American to graduate from Stanford University Medical School, the first African American head of a department at a Harvard-affiliated teaching hospital, the first African American professor of medicine at Yale University, a professor at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, and a Vietnam veteran. All of which is referenced from reliable sources. Yet he doesn't meet the "notability" requirement. And Wikipedia has an article on toilet paper orientation. Well done.
 * He may well meet the notability requirements. But you have to show that he meets it, through significant coverage in reliable sources. Right now that requirement is not met. I hope this clarify the situation for you.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 05:14, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It does not. The sources I've cited are from Brown University, Harvard University, the American Academy of Orthpaedic Surgeons, and the New York Times. I'm not sure which of those fails to meet the standard of "reliable". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bws7 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Firstly, reliable sources are almost always newspapers. Secondly, the Harvard University source is just a fact-displaying profile. Thirdly, the Brown Alumni Magazine may well be okay for notability, but notability requires multiple sources. Fourthly, the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons source is pretty much a primary source. Fourthly, while the NYT is very reliable and he is there, normally at least 3 (semi-) reliable sources would be safe to have an article like this. Also, please sign your comments.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 18:20, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Trump Orb relisting
Hi, I noticed you relisted the AFD discussion for the Trump Orb article, with the given reason being to "generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus". However, consensus seems to be overwhelmingly favorable towards deletion, while the cases being made for keeping have not responded to further scrutiny. Could you explain why you decided to relist it? Mr.  Anon  515  21:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * My relisting was because:


 * It is a controversial topic,
 * A previous discussion resulted in 'no consensus',
 * There was not a clear consensus.
 * I hope that my answer satisfies you.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 03:14, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted
Hello J947. Your account has been added to the " " user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk. The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex ShihTalk 08:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
 * Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
 * Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.
 * After what J tried to do at 2017 Puebla earthquake I would seriously reconsider this right. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 20:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Everybody slips up once in a while. Look for patterns, not for singular incidents.  Schwede 66  00:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

13:05:26, 21 September 2017 review of submission by AlfredGoodach
Hi J947, You reviewed the "Papamitrou" page and declined it due to not having enough notability. Can you give me some pointers so I can go ahead and make the appropriate changes? You also said that references to Wikipedia are not allowed so, I can fix that.

I am interested because this is the second time that this page was declined. This producer is signed to a Record Label that is part of Atlantic Records (Dreamchasers) and also has one song that made id to the Billboard 200. Also, on the Album named: "Wins and Losses" by Meek Mill that was released on 7/21/17, this producer has as 3 songs and the Album debuted No 3 on the Billboard 200..and it is still on the Billboard.

I read that this is a requirement for notability by an artist which he satisfied.

This is the article from Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)) that outlines in the "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" section the requirements in order to be notable. It also mentions that: "Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria".

Since he is a instrumentalist (creating music for hip hop artists) wouldn't he meet at least criteria #2 on this list?

Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you, Alfred.


 * Sorry, but criteria #2 means a single or album actually made by that artist. Also here are the main tip:
 * You don't need heaps and heaps of references for an article to be notable, you only need 2 that are reliable, secondary, and independent of the subject.
 * I hope my answer satisfies you.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 18:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thanks!  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 19:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Mass AfD
Sorry for stuffing up the mass AfD nomination, and thanks for tidying up after me. I've had another read of the procedure and have spotted where I stuffed up.  Schwede 66  09:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

G13
I would like to draw your attention to Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:04, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize for putting on the spot. Initially, I thought I was wrong and I had simply missed the scope of the change. However, I was doing some work with my own user space drafts and realized I have some over six months old that I prefer not to lose and I wondered if they were going to fall under the knife. That's what encouraged me to decide to ask for clarification. In retrospect, I should've come to you privately and discussed first. Thanks for pitching in and helping to clean out some of these drafts.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:49, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Untitled
Hi J947, thank you for your welcome. I've run into a snag, as I am being trolled by 'TheMovieGuy' re my work on Lost in space and I was hoping you could check this out for me. This guy doesn't make edits, he completely removes my entire body of work on the page This last time he even threatened the page with deletion if I reverted my work back, which I have done. I do need to add some citations and am currently compiling my sources but I am wondering who 'TheMovieGuy' thinks he is. My work on Lost in Space 2018 has been commended by people involved in the production, and many others. Any advice would be much appreciated Heres the revision history link https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lost_in_Space_(2018_TV_series)&action=history Cheers RokkoRokkoRokkanno (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)


 * My advice is: Communicate with and try to reach a consensus between you. Hope this helps,  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m)  19:52, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, please don't attack other editors.  J <i style="color:#137412;">947</i>(c) (m) 19:57, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Nba jersey contract history
The speedy deletion tag was removed from this page by its author, but they at least added some content. I tagged it some for improvement, but it may still be appropriate to propose for deletion, I'm not sure. Phil (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi J947,

Not sure if this guy is open for discussion You removed the deletion notice and then he put it back again. I will add citations ASAP. Question - A lot of the information is derived from Cast and Crew social media. How would I cite this - Links to the source info? RokkoRokkoRokkanno (talk) 00:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a successful proposal to create it, a new user right called "edit filter helper" is now assignable and revocable by administrators. The right allows non-administrators to view the details of private edit filters, but not to edit them.
 * Following a discussion about mass-application of ECP and how the need for logging and other details of an evolving consensus may have been missed by some administrators, a rough guide to extended confirmed protection has been written. This information page describes how the extended-confirmed aspects of the protection policy are currently being applied by administrators.

Technical news
 * You can now search for IP ranges at Special:Contributions. Some log pages and Special:DeletedContributions are not yet supported. Wildcards (e.g. 192.168.0.*) are also not supported, but the popular contribsrange gadget will continue to work.

Arbitration
 * Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
 * A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)