User talk:My name is not dave/Archive 7

Hiya!
I noticed you reverted an edit with the summary "No open proxies". Why? &#40;&#40;&#40;The Quixotic Potato&#41;&#41;&#41; (talk) 12:53, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Open proxies are not allowed to edit Wikipedia. If I am wrong in reverting then I am wrong. My apologies therefore to Mr. IP, even if it is or .  ! dave  13:17, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I do not know who the IP is. Open proxies are allowed to edit Wikipedia. The relevant policy can be found over at Open proxies. The page Advice to users using Tor is also quite interesting. Please revert yourself. Quote: "Open or anonymising proxies, including Tor, may be blocked from editing for any period at any time. While this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may freely use proxies until those are blocked.". If you have evidence of block evasion then that can be a legitimate reason to revert, but the fact that someone used an open proxy an sich is not. Have a nice day, &#40;&#40;&#40;The Quixotic Potato&#41;&#41;&#41; (talk) 13:21, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You too. Undid, but I know who this is, pretty sure. ! dave  13:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. &#40;&#40;&#40;The Quixotic Potato&#41;&#41;&#41; (talk) 13:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: Outreach and Invitations:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
 * Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!
 * If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: . Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive
 * A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
 * Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. —  TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC) 
 * ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
 * The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
 * To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

Agustus Montrose
Why did you revert my edit? HE'S A FAKE! HE NEVER EXISTED! Did you even check the page before restoring it? The links are all bogus, and the picture is that of Robert Ingersoll. Once again, I will be restoring my edit, because it is the truth. 96.2.169.164 (talk) 21:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Balans
Hi there! I saw you undone edits by an IP on "Balans", which — as the GA writer — I thank you for. However, the IP seems to not stop reverting to his allegedly better version. Can you help me report him (or how do you proceed in such situations?) You can also check the disturbing message he left on my user page. Best or regards and thanks; Cartoon network freak (talk) 11:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Go to WP:ANI or WP:ANEW. There's a good chance this is a WP:sock, or if not, an account used by multiple people, see their use of 'our', which is strange, and nonetheless not allowed. He's just wishing us a merry Christmas... ;) ! dave  11:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Relist
This AfD was not even minimally fit for a relist.Multiple votes by a SPA do not delay the inevitable.And wishing you and your loved ones a pleasnt 2018! Regards:) Winged Blades Godric 15:29, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Although now deleted anyway, I relisted it because there had been no useful discussion after the last relist, however, after looking at the discussion again, I am not sure why relisted it, there was enough for a decision before the relist. Shouldn't just blindly follow someone else really. And to you too.  ! dave  16:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, !dave, I initially hesitated to talk this because I don't want be raising issues on minor problems, but I wasn't aware there's similar thread to my concern already. Well, this AfD actually also deserve no more relist. You should understand this because even the nominator wasn't in favor of deleting it, he only wants it to be merged. And two good standing editors objected (both with keep !votes and with more sources) and it was relisted, but nobody commented thereafter. So what do you think is the point of relisting again?. The appropriate thing you should've done was either to skip it (if you don't fully understand it) or to close it as Keep and add (optional) note: that if the nominator feels, it should still be merged, he should request merger at the article's talkpage. However this is not any serious issue as I even decided to just not talk to you about it but on seeing there's already header about relist, I think it is the right thing to do with the hope that this will help you next when deciding on relist option. Thanks Ammarpad (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Once again I based the relist on the lack of discussion from the last relist. If someone behind me believes that there was not enough consensus to close and insufficient discussion has not allowed to relieve that, then, in this case I would be relisting the discussion. Since, barring exceptional circumstances, XfDs should only be relisted twice, it's kinda "why not?". But after feedback given I should read over the votes and see what can be made of it. There should be focus at the end of every listing period to put the discussion to a close, not another relist, and that should be our focus. ! dave  19:24, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. –Ammarpad (talk) 12:13, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

65.117.163.250 on Sockpuppet investigations/Cristina0517
You edit on Newsy has been undone by user:65.117.163.250. This may affect the your current entry for a sockpuppet investigation: Sockpuppet investigations/Cristina0517. I am a relatively new user so I am not comfortable beyond my comment there (because I am not even sure I did that 100% right). Thank you for your time!&#8213; Matthew J. Long -Talk-☖  22:57, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries. ! dave  12:38, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from India–European Union relations into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. "The another page referred to above is User:My name is not dave/India-EUrelations. Just a reminder: it only takes a few words in the edit summary to comply with WP:COPYWITHIN."  &mdash; jmcgnh  (talk)  (contribs)  04:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * U1'd. Don't need it no more. ! dave  07:51, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced IP post
DAVE OR WHATEVER YOUR NAME IS ? your citing an opinion of one person for the band as it existed from 1977-1980, it appears Wikipedia has a lot of bogus information and it can cause damage.. maybe its time to pay Wiki in San Francisco a legal visit and shut down the entire site. I know your not going to change it to cite accurate data, how about this ?????? nobody can even call the band Steppenwolf right now read here http://www.paradiseartists.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/john-kay-rider.pdf  but I guess reading the contract rider of John Kays band 2nd paragraph wont d any good either... seems from reading peoples comments on here Wiki is allowing a lot of false damaging data and my friend that's infringing on the 1ST AMEMENDMENT
 * You have been blocked anyway for the above legal threat, but allow me to read the link. ! dave  10:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, the source neither confirms nor denies New Steppenwolf, in that, I have no idea what you or the source is going on about. ! dave  10:58, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

One peoples projects
the links you asked for

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/daryle-jenkins-has-stepped-up-to-explain-the-shadowy-groups-violent-tactics-to-the-world.html https://www.amren.com/news/2014/01/daryle-lamont-jenkins-of-one-peoples-project-ordered-to-pay-50000-for-shutting-down-2010-american-renaissance-conference/ MNSBC News https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLfIxmy2otU http://slackbastard.anarchobase.com/?p=3999

you need any more proof
 * None of them mention the exact words of 'far left', so trying to assert that the group is far left with those sources is WP:SYNTH, it's a bit like saying 'a seagull is a duck because both are birds'. The YouTube one is a copyright violation by someone filming their TV and posting it to YouTube (can't therefore be used as a source), and the other one is a mere blog post which is not a reliable source. This is a timesink discussing with you. Last chance before I start doing WP:RBI (can't block but I'll get an admin to do that) . ! dave  12:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Tabarnia??
So you are reverting to the trolling that SergioRamos wrote ? . Do you really thing his oppinions about "highly ethnicist" ,"for intimidation", "pretended" , "pancastellanist",  etc.. have space in Wikipedia?

I strongly suggest you revert the whole lot to before SergioRamos vandalizing of the page.
 * By the way, you managed to completely ignore all three requests at the top of the edit window. Please remember them next time. Indeed I did revert to what is humorously called 'The Wrong Version'. We need something to work with, and I have started/continued on with a discussion on the talk page. Please continue there. ! dave  11:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You have an answer, sir. Thanks! (there was NO "vandalizing" in ANY WAY, and I NOT tolerate THAT vocabulary: there is a REAL problem with that article).Sergio Ramos 93 (talk) 12:56, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks so much for fixing up the talk pages for Ali Darzi, etc. Much appreciated. --FeanorStar7 10:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries. ! dave  10:37, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

One-click archiving ANI threads
Hi My name is not dave, thanks for helping clear ANI of closed threads. Please remember however that closed threads should not be one-clicked archived until at least 24 hours after the close. (This allows all interested editors enough time to view the close, no matter what their time zone, work schedule, sleep schedule, or login schedule is.) To accurate gauge whether at least 24 hours has passed since the close, Google utc time, and subtract one day from that (remembering to add 12:00 for PM times), and don't archive any threads closed after that time. Thanks very much, Softlavender (talk) 12:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, alright. Noted. Thanks. ! dave  12:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Currently working here
Hello Dave... I am working on Citations... they are offline currently, this is very old info that we just found in an old book in the library... please bear with us as we add the citations

Kizmag (talk) 19:48, 30 December 2017 (UTC)Kizmag
 * Oh, okay. ! dave  19:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:


 * The total number of reviews completed for the month.
 * The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * You're welcome. ! dave  21:02, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Azamat Arapbayev
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

My article removed
Why was my article declined Sirshak SBE (talk) 15:20, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You did not provide any indication of its notability. Read the decline notice. All should be clear with that. ! dave  15:22, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

edit on article draft 2018 Quito Open
Hi, i see that the article draft that i have made was rejected, so i worked on it. Can you review it and if is ok to promote it as an article?
 * Please sign your posts. There are instructions above during edit mode on how to do so. I am noting that I am currently reviewing this. ! dave  15:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Brighton station pic
Yep, looks good to me. I can't believe how ancient the old one was: Millie's Cookies and those nasty old blue-painted chipboard walls went about 7 or 8 years ago! I've got lots of internal photos from 2007 to the present day, but they await sorting and uploading and I am years behind (!). Cheers, Hassocks 5489 (Floreat Hova!) 20:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, exactly, even if that Thameslink train is in the way, it's a nice overview of the station interior, and a nice update from a photo taken almost ten years ago. ! dave  20:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

page review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rauf_Tofic
hey sir, can u pls check out this draft page for me?(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Rauf_Tofic) will like u to review it thanks41.204.51.130 (talk) 15:08, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Shamsi Traders
Yeah, the name drop was U5, but I couldn't defend a G11. I was waiting for something clearer for the SPAMU, but someone gave 'em a softer. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. ! dave  06:39, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Relist bias
Hi, I'm just leaving a note to encourage you to read WP:Relist bias, and consider the points it makes. We achieved consensus last year that expired XfDs should be evaluated for soft deletion by closing administrators. While this means an admin might decide to relist, they also can equally soft delete the page after 1 week if they believe the nomination rationale is valid. This is especially true for AfDs that have already been relisted once. One of the points that essay makes is that non-admins should typically stay away from making calls that they don't have the technical ability to implement. In this case, the choice of whether to soft delete cannot be made by a non-admin, and thus XfDs that don't have any comments should typically be left for admins to evaluate. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That essay has some good points. Do you have any specific XfDs that I have relisted today or yesterday (or before) where this may apply, or just a general note? ! dave  21:41, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If you check my recent contribs I think you'll find 5 AfDs that I just soft deleted that you had relisted. There are some admins who do prefer to relist every time, but there are more who are moving to the soft delete approach (and this is the policy). It's a matter for admin discretion, and like the essay says, you can't really use that discretion if you don't have all the buttons. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I honestly thought 'do two relists if nothing then it's soft delete', but now knowing otherwise, and taking the essay into account, I'll make sure to take extra consideration (in other words, not relist!) when a) the article has already been relisted once and b) the deletion reason seems plausible. Cheers for the advice. ! dave  21:56, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we had an RfC last February on it, and the policy got updated. The practice is changing slowly on it, but the thing is that there isn't an opportunity for admins to evaluate the situation if all the people who do NACs relist everything automatically. Not your fault, but I do like to reach out when people don't seem to be aware . Hope all is well with you. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Checking William T. Reid, IV article
Hi. Can you please take a look at Draft:William T. Reid, IV article. It has been in review for 10 days now. Since you approved Reid Collins & Tsai I assume this is a much easier task for you than for other reviewers. Thank you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:16, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Noted. Was looking at sources earlier. Will finish when I have the time. ! dave  20:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 07:50, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (TheReportOfTheWeek) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating TheReportOfTheWeek, My name is not dave!

Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"You may be interested in this copyrighted Truther Network site. When reviewing your article I thought at first that it was a copyvio of that site but I now believe he copied you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)"

To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.
 * Yup. He has copied us. Hopefully I can find an email address on that website to tell him what he should do. ! dave  12:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of TheReportOfTheWeek for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TheReportOfTheWeek 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/TheReportOfTheWeek until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Surachit (talk) 05:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Delete
This is a made up article about me that should not exist. If this is allowed in here wiki will end up being known for made up info Nikkita nicks (talk) 09:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please wait for the deletion discussion to progress. ! dave  10:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: New Year Backlog Drive results:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
 * We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
 * We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
 * Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

Engage:BDR
I'm curious about the reason for the deletion of the article about the company engage:BDR. It was my understanding the user space on an account is used for creating drafts and experimenting. Unless I did something wrong the engage:BDR article was not published onto Wikipedia but only a draft of an article that I was working on for future publication.

Thank you for tagging the article for advertising. I was not trying to write an ad, but an article and this shows me that I have a lot of work to do. While writing the article I tried to avoid sounding too promotional by omitting all specific names of the services the company offers. obviously this was not enough. What makes it sound like an ad? What else could I do to remove the promotional tone and make the article read less like an ad?

As for conflict of interest I disclosed and discussed with the admin Rhaworth and can be viewed here. But to summarize it. I don't work for engage:BDR but I am a friend of the CEO Ted Dhanik and he asked me to write a Wikipedia article for his company engage:BDR which is a publicly traded company. I am not being compensated for this work.

The article is still in its infancy and it is my intention to disclose the conflict of interest when I submit the article for publication. I did not know I was required to disclose conflict of interest of unpublished articles that only exist as drafts on a user space. &mdash; Allabouttech (talk) 22:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Dunno why Allabouttech deleted this. Are you prepared to let them submit their version via AfC and be told yet again that the company is non-notable? &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:51, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I think the issue is best summarised in your very famous words, "Kindly wait until someone that does not have a conflict of interest thinks the company is notable." The G11 criteria applies to all areas on the site. There was a lot of puffery and WP:PEACOCK on it, and as you appear to be confused about its promotional nature, you have fallen into the traditional hole for people with a conflict of interest; you  don't know what's neutral, your COI makes it difficult to use neutral language. Considering that the mainspace article has been protected from creation and the userspace draft was worth a WP:G11 deletion, Mr. Dhanik should follow the quoted advice above. I apologise for the inconvenience, but this is the best solution for all parties going forward.  ! dave  15:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Bitconnect
I don't have any financial ties to bitconnect. Charlesmatthias (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, brilliant. No general conflict of interest as well? ! dave  20:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Arctic Zero follow-up
Just wanted to say that the polices and guidelines on COI editing are perfectly OK and make sense, it's their implementation that is screwed up. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 17:38, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

ORCP Comments
Just a brief explanation - I checked out Yourmistake's contributions and was able to AGF they were trying to work out where their article went. Jarmusic2, conversely, has engaged in disruptive editing, vandalism and personal attacks, and while responding in kind wasn't big and clever (let alone bad practice for an admin) I decided the issue needed knocking on the head. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:17, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Duly noted, fair enough! talk to ! dave 11:58, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I had a look through your contributions to see how likely a successful RfA would go. There's nothing particularly amiss in the usual areas (content, AfD, CSD, admin page contributions) aside from a couple of suggestions to dial back on the non-admin AfD relists a bit, one article you created that was then deleted (Articles for deletion/Life of Boris) and of course that block. I think you stopped hammering the Huggle button like you're playing Daley Thompson's Decathlon after that and realised you needed to slow down a bit. I think communication is the one area you might want to look into a bit - most of your user talk contributions are the standard Twinkle boilerplate. As an admin you have to be able to respond to complaints in a calm and reasoned manner. I don't mind you being a low-rent version of Martinevans123 (if that's what you really want); it's important to have a laugh around here and enjoy yourself, but when the circumstances require you to be serious, you've got to do it. As you can see from Cordless Larry's RfA in particular, the intelligent and thought-out answers to the questions have drawn a substantial amount of support; without that, he could have been in trouble.

I would say keep doing what you're doing and maybe a year after the block (which'll be in about October / November) we'll see where we are. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  21:22, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Will email you back. talk to ! dave 21:35, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages! ACTRIAL:
 * ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing
 * Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking  place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled
 * While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

Help with edits...
Hello! It's P135860. I am not here to rant about you removing my edit, as I have seen your standings and agree with them on my talk page. What I WOULD like to ask though is how I remove an edit, as in, completely erasing it from Wikipedia history. It has nothing to do with the edit itself, more the fact that my IP address is visible. I created this account to recreate the edit done when I did NOT have one, thus showing my IP. Yes, I was aware it would be showed in the audit logs, but now, considering I have an account, I'd like someone to remove my edit completely to avoid my IP being visible. You seem to know a lot more about Wikipedia than me, as I have practically no knowledge about editing, so help is greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!P135860 (talk) 22:05, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah bollocks, I forgot to say that I emailed an admin to get him to remove your IP address from public view. Meet Oshwah. He'll be around soon to remove it. Thanks, talk to ! dave 22:06, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Check
this and the note on the ticket.Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 10:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah I replied. talk to ! dave 15:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Womble bond dickinson.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Womble bond dickinson.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * It was removed randomly. restored it. talk to ! dave  14:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * talk to ! dave 14:27, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * There's a lot of that going around (250 to be precise). I made it through 20 files (saving about 8) before quitting. Primefac (talk) 14:52, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Well that is odd. talk to ! dave 15:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Womble bond dickinson.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Womble bond dickinson.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Anvar Artykov
Hello! Your submission of Anvar Artykov at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:30, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 15:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Anvar Artykov
Hi, I tweaked your hook in prep because I thought it was interesting/important to mention he was elected as a "people's governor". Hope that's okay with you. Yoninah (talk) 23:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah I'm fine with anything here, go ahead :) talk to ! dave 17:59, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * thanks. You get the Easy to Please Award! Yoninah (talk) 20:23, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Anvar Artykov
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:
 * WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 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.

Deletion tags
 * Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:
 * A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons
 * There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy
 * Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English News Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * 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, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.
 * Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
 * The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive! Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
 * Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: NPPbarnstar SE.png. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: RR3217-0014 100 rubles USSR 1989 Gold avers.png, Swiss-Commemorative-Coin-1991-CHF-250-reverse.png, Coin of Kazakhstan 500Thinker averse.png, US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.jpg.
 * Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Where u did not find notability
I have provided you enough references to the artical [swathi naidu(anchor)] They are many sources given to you Besteditor (talk) 13:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The person who rejected it should tell you the problem. talk to ! dave 13:10, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

I replied on Dave's talk page only who is dave here. Besteditor (talk) 13:15, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This is my own talk page. You initially posted to your own talk page. I replied to your post. will give a further explanation at Draft:Swathi Naidu. Thanks. talk to ! dave  13:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers. Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.
 * June backlog drive


 * New technology, new rules
 * New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
 * Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
 * Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.


 * Editathons
 * Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The Signpost
 * The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Nomination of TheReportOfTheWeek for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TheReportOfTheWeek 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/TheReportOfTheWeek& 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.  Velella  Velella Talk 09:30, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.


 * Project news
 * The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.
 * As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.


 * There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See New pages patrol/Coordination for more info to see if you can help out.


 * Other
 * A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.


 * Moving to Draft and Page Mover
 * Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
 * If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
 * Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
 * The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
 * The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ticketerlogo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Ticketerlogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:48, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.
 * Backlog


 * Community Wishlist Proposal
 * There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
 * Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!


 * Project updates
 * ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
 * There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.


 * New scripts
 * User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js(info) — A new script created for quickly placing copyvio-revdel on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018
Hello ,
 * Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
 * Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.


 * If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.


 * We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.


 * With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas Cook Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Global ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Thomas_Cook_Group check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Thomas_Cook_Group?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018
Hello ,

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.
 * Reviewer of the Year
 * Thanks are also extended for their work to (15,059 reviews),  (12,760reviews),  (9,001reviews),  (8,440reviews),  (8,092reviews),   (5,306reviews),  (4,153 reviews),  (4,016reviews),  and  (3,615reviews)., , , and  have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only sevenmonths, while , with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top100 reviewers.

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.
 * Less good news, and an appeal for some help

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.
 * Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minutevideo was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Training video

2019


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

begin it with music and memories

Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Never too late. Happy new year! talk to ! dave 14:25, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17


Hello ,


 * News
 * The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.


 * Discussions of interest
 * Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
 * db-blankdraft was merged into G13 (Discussion)
 * A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
 * There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.


 * Reminders
 * NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD  because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.


 * NPP Tools Report
 * Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
 * copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
 * The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828 Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review. 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. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (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)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019


Hello ,

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important. Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR. The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever. NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so  you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations. Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for  the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging. Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway. School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * QUALITY of REVIEWING
 * Backlog
 * Move to draft
 * Notifying users
 * PERM
 * Other news

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 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)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019
Hello ,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon. There are now holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action. Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays. Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox. Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards. Admin has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers. Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources. Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13. The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights. There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion. To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Getting the queue to 0
 * Coordinator
 * This month's refresher course
 * Tools
 * It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
 * It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
 * Reviewer Feedback
 * Second set of eyes
 * Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
 * Do be sure to have our talk page  on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
 * Arbitration Committee
 * Community Wish list

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Bakyt Torobayev/GA2
My name is not dave, it's been over two months since this GA review was opened. I don't see any sign that the GA bot pinged you, so I'm making sure you know about the review having been started; hopefully, you can start working on the issues raised by the reviewer before the review closes due to lack of a response. Best of luck! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Seachangelogo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Seachangelogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:44, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019


This year's Reviewer of the Year is. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.
 * Reviewer of the Year

Special commendation again goes to who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to and  who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by.
 * Redirect autopatrol

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.
 * Source Guide Discussion

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * This month's refresher course

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020
Hello ,

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.
 * Source Guide Discussion

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.
 * Redirects


 * Discussions and Resources
 * There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
 * A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
 * A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
 * A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.
 * Refresher

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of All the Stations for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article All the Stations 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/All the Stations 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. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020
Hello ,

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference. In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.
 * Your help can make a difference
 * Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate
 * Discussions and Resources
 * A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
 * Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
 * A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
 * Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello ,



It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to and  who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to, , and who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
 * Year in review

has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
 * Reviewer of the Year

As a special recognition and thank you has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
 * NPP Technical Achievement Award

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)