User talk:Natureium/Archive 4

Please comment on Talk:Machine Intelligence Research Institute
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Machine Intelligence Research Institute. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Clearing Edit Request
Thanks for making the request change to Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, here. I was wondering, is there a procedure for removing the template (and maybe separately, removing the article from the list of edit requests (Link failed for some reason)?

--Cheers! Elfabet (talk) 17:41, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I had to look up the documentation for the template because it doesn't work if I just add "|done" like some others, but I've fixed it now. Natureium (talk) 17:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

close challenge challenge close challenge
Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Challenge no longer looks like a real word to me. Natureium (talk) 15:03, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Word. Word word word. Word word, word word word. Word.
 * Weird. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:13, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Woad the color, woad the sensation, woad the place, woad the flower~ --Cheers! Elfabet (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Piero De Benedictis
hi, working on Piero page, going to cite references to validate the facts of his history that you seem so focused on deleting. just letting you know ahead of time, champ. Earl E. Smith (talk) 21:59, 14 September 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)

Phobias
I get that we shouldn't cater to everyone's whims, but why would we want to trigger phobias in people by having an image of the trigger on the page about the phobia? If someone wants to look up more information about it, Wikipedia would be a good place to start seeing as how if you Google the phobia name you get pictures of the thing you're trying to avoid. There's several other phobia pages that have had images removed due to the same thing, and it helps people with those phobias find out more information about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demasu (talk • contribs) 21:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Using the revdel template
Hi Natureium. I've noticed you've been copyvio-revdel in several articles recently. When you add it, it's important to remember to specify the revisions that will need to be redact, so that admins know what to hide. You can do so using the  and   parameters, or if necessary, ,  , etc. There are more instructions on how to do this here. Thanks!-- SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi man !
I was created page Tây Sơn military tactics and organization i'm think it ok. Đông Minh (talk) 05:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Question
Hi, you recently added a copyvio tag to the List of United States Navy SEALs, but you haven't posted any further information about the matter on the talk page (as noted in the tag). Will you be adding any additional info any time soon? Thanks - wolf  09:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know what kind of further information would be necessary. I reverted 2 edits with an edit summary identifying them as a copyvio, and then added an RD1 tag asking for the revisions to be revdel'd. What other details are you looking for? Natureium (talk) 12:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps take a look at the post just above about this topic by SkyGazer. - wolf  15:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No one with the technical ability to revdel has mentioned anything, and they seem to be figuring out what needs to be revdel'd just fine, as demonstrated by your link above. This template makes me want to pull my hair out, so unless someone that revdels things complains that they can't figure out what revisions I want revdel'd, I'll keep on keeping on. Natureium (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't really want to to get too involved with this, and as you mentioned neither Wolf or I have the technical ability to revdel, but I would like to point out that the documentation for the copyvio-revdel template specifically says:


 * "You must specify at least one revision (using the start parameter alone), or first range of revisions to redact."


 * -- SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * it's not a policy nor does the template require it. Drop the stick. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  16:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Paul R. Bartrop
Hi. You recently tagged Paul R. Bartrop for WP:BLPPROD. I'm just wondering where this is up to? I noticed that a lot of edits were made to the page by Jelineke whose ONLY edits are to that page, AND that Bartop's wife's maiden name is Jelineke...I'm not pushing for removal of the page, just wondering where it is up to? Cabrils (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Anthony Bourdain

 * My edits to these pages was not removing / censoring topical information. It is to change the tenor of the language from a biased perspective to a neutral one. The word 'commit' used in conjunction with suicide connotes that it is a criminal or immoral act; suicide is neither. I do not think these articles, or any others, should not be denigrating people that have died by suicide.
 * This issue has been discussed numerous times on wikipedia, and you do not have consensus to make these changes. If you continue to make disruptive edits, you will be blocked. Natureium (talk) 19:34, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I just signed up today; please show me where this has been discussed. I obviously believe this to be the wrong conclusion to arrive at. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neoluddism (talk • contribs) 19:56, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Single source biography
Mark A. Ediger is also a single source biography. Can you provide a reference where "we don't write biographies based on single(but very reliable] source." So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 20:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "Sources"[2] should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.[3] Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability. - WP:N. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  20:06, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Flag officers already meet the WP:n criteria. So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Just because another page isn't compliant with wikipedia guidelines and no one has noticed yet does not mean that another page should also. To directly quote WP:WHYN, "We require multiple sources so that we can write a reasonably balanced article that complies with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, rather than representing only one author's point of view. This is also why multiple publications by the same person or organization are considered to be a single source for the purpose of complying with the "multiple" requirement." Natureium (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Flag officers already meet the WP:n criteria.So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 20:20, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Doesn't mean the tags don't apply. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  20:27, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * His point was that we need multiple sources to meet notability, and i countered it. Again, can you provide a reference where "we don't write biographies based on single(but very reliable) source?" So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "Significant in depth coverage" implies multiple sources. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  21:12, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Reuters - The World's Most Innovative Universities
Thank you for alerting me that this page was speedily deleted. That was bull. The information was from college and university rankings wiki site. It was not advertisement and I never looked at the site they mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikecurry1 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Signatures
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Trần dynasty military tactics and organization
Hi Natureium. You draftified this once before, but the creator basically copied-pasted it back into the main space the next day. Not sure if a WP:HISTMERGE is needed, but these seems to be more WP:OR than not. Also, not sure if the creator understood what you meant by submitting the draft to AFC. The other articles/drafts this editor has created like Scorpion attack and the Draft:List of business tactics probably need to be assessed as well since they too seem more OR than not. — Marchjuly (talk) 07:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Justlettersandnumbers • L235
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Guerillero • NativeForeigner •  Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
 * There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

Technical news
 * Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
 * The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
 * Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
 * The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
 * Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
 * Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations). Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

2018
hi, not need nations at 2018 asian para games transfer to draft. you can redirect all of them to 2018 Asian Para Games. it is recent events.Futsalmaniasa (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Short descriptions
Hi Natureium, If you can think of a better short description for any article, don't hesitate to make an improvement, just like with any other content. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Interface administrators
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Interface administrators. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Reverse ELISA discussion
Hi, Thanks for the more clear explanation. I have spent the last 10 years working with ELIZA tests and I ask you to consider a few things. The MDRES citation guidelines do not have a prohibition, but say "Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content." Plus, an article on the general meaning of an ELIZA is not truly medical by the letter of guidelines. Also, the other type descriptions have zero or one citation. I don't believe the patent citations are out of line in this case. I also disagree that there are that many fundamental types of ELISA tests. There are many, many, many tests, but only an handful of fundamental types of tests. The "reverse" ELIZA is a very different type of an ELISA.

As for the advantage/disadvantage, I do understand your concern and agree that could be worded better. Though I do generally think that the current propensity to "always" have an opposing view sometime gets carried away and can provide a false sense of "equality" of opinions to an uninformed reader/listener.

If you have any concerns that I may be trying to "gin up business" I would hope I can put those to rest. The business is done. We are in the process of closing it down. The first and seminal patent has already reverted to the public domain due to non-payment of maintenance fees. The second will follow shortly. The only investor with any remaining interest is the State of Texas and they have very little. Over the last 10 years, the reverse ELISA was widely described (to our faces anyway) as a pretty serious breakthrough. I considered a sort mention in this article a suitable place for a record. I respect the obvious time and talent that you put into Wikipedia. But, I do ask that you reconsider your decision to delete the text that I added. Is there a middle ground? I will be happy to discuss further with you or anyone else. DCharbonnet (talk) 22:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)


 * You are right that the other sections do not have sources. The abundance of unsourced material on wikipedia is a point of frustration for me. If you want to add this back to the article, I would recommend finding some neutral sources, perhaps some review articles that compare methods of ELISAs or protein quantitation. I did some googling to try and find more information about "reverse ELISA"s and I found a mention in the book "Comprehensive Toxicology" but was unable to access it, so this may be an option. ELISAs aren't strictly medical material, but they fall in the biomedical category that MEDRS applies to. Primary sources are discouraged on Wikipedia in general, but much more strictly enforced for biomedical material. Natureium (talk) 20:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I will do some research and get it as right as I can. DCharbonnet (talk) 01:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Yet another somewhat smaller barnstar
My barnstar sort of kind of got shrunk in the dryer. But here you go:

*   <--Barnstar

I'll get you a proper one next time.— CYBERPOWER  (Around ) 01:52, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

A kitten-star for you
I would be more creative except...it’s late and I’m tired. Anyways, thanks for your helpful quality contributions to Wikimedia, onwiki and elsewhere, as well as for not being a sock.

Vermont (talk) 01:59, 16 October 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)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

AN/I
There is currently a discussion at regarding. &#x2230; Bellezzasolo &#x2721;  Discuss  22:57, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Removing the banner on Hedvig Hricak
Would you mind taking a look at the warning banner on the article for Hedvig Hricak? It got placed in June of 2017, but the article as it stands now bears little resemblance to where it was then. Here's the diff for reference. Do you think it'd be appropriate to remove the COI template at this point?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Looks like all your edits have been via the talk page and the article is substantially different than when edited by the accounts listed in the talk page template, so I'll go ahead and remove it, as it should no longer apply to the article content. Natureium (talk) 12:03, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Why do you think my edits at Weill Cornell medical college-Qatar are violating? I am not stating personal opinion, but actually putting forward facts. These include their current ranking, I do not know why you keep removing this when it is indeed true and cited. I think adding its rank would provide more information to the reader about the institution's status. Moreover, the criticism I added is well known to the education sector in the state of Qatar. I believe it is your problem that you are not well updated about the topic you are trying to edit. Please put forward any questions you might have so that we can agree on an edit to the page mentioned above.

About the FC Drita – managers problem
The FC Drita – managers that I created is a template, I created it because I wanted to make page of Drita more modernized, and I have a problem, how do I make a new template that i'am creating or I have just created to make it an actual template?

~Dardn2015~

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Sir Sputnik
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Kudpung • Liz • Lourdes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Everyking • Jackmcbarn

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg AGK • Ivanvector • Stwalkerster • TonyBallioni

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Amorymeltzer • Oshwah • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Keilana

Guideline and policy news
 * A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
 * A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
 * A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
 * A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news
 * Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
 * A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
 * The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration
 * Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
 * The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Brush Border
Brush border and the Striated Border have been mistaken. The content originally in Brush Border should be Striated Border. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaochitz (talk • contribs) 16:41, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , If the title is incorrect, the page can be moved. Please read WP:MOVE. Pages should not be cut and pasted to change a title, because this leaves the edit history behind. Natureium (talk) 17:29, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Public domain works and links
Hello, thanks for your comment. On the supposed violation or carelessness in re WP:COPYLINK, could you clarify how "you know or reasonably suspect that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright"? Did you read what I wrote about copyright status of work by the U.S. government and is there a way I can clarify it? Thank you, Nemo 17:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

The Lack of Balanced Debate on MMR
While the MMR section makes over-the-top attacks any reports that dare to question the safety of his vaccine, anyone that attempts to question/correct some of the more unbalanced statements are at risk being blocked. Why is this? K y blogg (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly sure what you are asking, but the article is written based on the information in WP:MEDRS compliant sources. If you have an issue with this, I suggest the article talk page. Natureium (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Aichmophobia
I agree with the recent removal of the image. It's hard to fathom that someone looking at this article would need a picture of a knife in order to know what a knife is. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Special:Diff/868096181
Not challenging you, but removing links seems to be something that happens with VisualEditor. I've seen a lot of edits that are tagged "Visual edit" and remove links for no apparent reason, and it doesn't look intentional. You might want to be aware of this. Or not. ♫ ekips39 (talk) ❀ 00:03, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Very strange. I'll look into that more. Thanks. Natureium (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Eds
Eds edits Zebrazebrazebra2 (talk) 01:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing New food processor, Natureium.

Unfortunately Barkeep49 has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

"Unreviewing per consensus on not patrolling CSD tagged pages"

To reply, leave a comment on Barkeep49's talk page.

Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: New Money (2019)
Hello Natureium. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of New Money (2019), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: article can't be a duplicate of itself. Thank you. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 19:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Hmm, I must have messed that up with the toolbar somehow, because there are definitely 2 articles. Natureium (talk) 22:45, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Hi, I'm fine to have the New Money (2019) page deleted, as the film is actually a 2017 film and it's been duplicated. Would it be possible for you to change the title of the nigerian New Money (film) to New Money (2018 Film) so there's no confusion between the two titles? The American New Money film will be released this april. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosnopfl (talk • contribs) 18:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Your ANEW report
Hi Natureium. In the future, please report only the edits of a user at WP:ANEW. It's not necessary to add further remarks like "because they are smarter than everyone else", since that'll only incite drama. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 22:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , yeah, on second thought, that wasn’t a good idea. Natureium (talk) 22:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Let it go
Are you serious? Do you really think someone who:

A. Appeared on 3 reality shows, 1 being a guest judge

B. Appeared in an award winning film

C. Appeared in 2 high budget music video with big name artists

D. Has over 300K followers on Instagram ALONE with 80K on twitter

You think that's not notable? Wrong. And I have told you A number of times that they deserve a wiki page and gave good sources and good spelling/grammar. And you've never acknowledged my points either, you just ignored me and unfairly removed the page after 3 people, three people voted, and now you're threatening to block me? How dare you. There is NO reason that page shouldn't be made. None. I suggest you stop what you're doing, let the page be and deal with it. You are in the wrong, not me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratherbe2000 (talk • contribs)

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)

IP refspam
Regarding the ANI discussion. Usually Wikipedia tries not to get our editors involved in off-wiki activities that might have repercussions even if that activity seems intended to benefit the encyclopedia. Especially if what is going on is to stop some kind of vandalism or disruption. The people who are best placed to undertake that would be the Arbitration Committee, but they are likely too busy and any request would go into a long queue. So I'd say let it go before trying to scold someone for disruption on a non-Wikipedia email address. (It might be different if you were trying to improve some article and you thought there was an expert who might help you who might not respond to WP email). There is also the WP:OUTING policy though opinions often differ as to exactly how that applies. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Merger of individual articles of books in The Edge Chronicles series
I have suggested that the individual book articles of the series be merged into The Edge Chronicles. Please discuss the merger at Talk:The_Edge_Chronicles PS I am not watching this page so please WP:Ping me if you reply. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 20:12, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

HEPES article
Dear Natureium,

I actually don't understand the reason why a link to a page in which the Wiki user can compare the pH of one chemical to another similar one is not allowed to be published. This is one of the most important information scientists need prior to selecting the best buffer for their research. Looks like you are not from this field, and is just randomly blocking any link that you suspect to be spam.

There are other links that could be added instead, but just don't impede thousands of scientists to get easier access to this information.

https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/core-bioreagents/biological-buffers/learning-center/buffer-reference-center.html http://staff.ustc.edu.cn/~liuyz/methods/buffer.htm http://www.hopaxfc.com/en/blog/useful-ph-range-of-biological-buffers

I even linked some other Wiki pages of similar chemicals to HEPES page and they were all deleted. I honestly think it is hard to understand what is your purpose.

DanielMaia (talk) 02:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC)DanielMaia

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svgk Chan

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
 * A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
 * A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
 * A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news
 * Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
 * To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
 * Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.

Arbitration
 * Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous
 * In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
 * Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries
 * (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 6
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CD3 and Translocation ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Anaplastic_large-cell_lymphoma check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Anaplastic_large-cell_lymphoma?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

reverts to WP:Admin
The common understanding of Wikipedia policies, as far as I am aware is to be descriptive, not prescriptive. I am just updating the page to document the current reality of the situation. Please restore the edit or show where the status quo ante is being enforced. Best. Crazynast 17:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Something happening once does not make it a policy.The bureaucrat specifically cited WP:IAR. Natureium (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually the IAR is not what bothers me, it's the policy by fiat from ArbCom. Since this is one, very limited area where the is no other remit except for ArbCom, and except for the yearly elections they are a body of 'last resort' I don't see how this cannot be policy now. (Since ArbCom has set the precident that Good Faith is the only rationale needed to justify this without consequence). Regards,  Crazynast 17:27, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Arbcom doesn't make policy. If you would like to propose changes to policy based on Arbcom's decision, the place for that is at the village pump. Natureium's reversion was correct. Brad  v 🍁 17:34, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * "ArbCom doesn't make policy."  G M G  talk  18:02, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That's a misreading of how the case concluded, I think. There were two findings of fact that each unanimously and unequivocally state the desysopping went against policy.  That ArbCom didn't decide to punish the bureaucrat has nothing to do with policy. ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 17:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)


 * While bureaucrats have the de facto technical ability to remove the administrative toolset, they do not possess the de jure standing to revoke an administrator's entitlement (which is granted by the community). –xenotalk 17:47, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Ale Jithendra, Natureium.

Unfortunately Insertcleverphrasehere has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

"If you were not aware of the recent change, PRODed and CSD tagged articles should not be marked as reviewed, per recent consensus here Cheers,"

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

—  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) (click me!)    00:49, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Your Merge Proposal Today
Hello, today you proposed that the new article Pros and cons to the legalization of marijuana be merged to Legality of cannabis. You skipped a step in the merge proposal procedure, that being a talk page entry at the destination page to discuss. I completed that step on your behalf, so you might want to go to Talk:Legality of cannabis to further describe your reasoning for the proposal. I agree with the idea, by the way. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 19:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)