User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2013/August

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 04:05, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 01:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 11:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Your assistance please
You closed Articles for deletion/Fahd Salih Sulayman Al Jutayli as "delete". I request you follow the example of some other administrators, and (1) make this a redirect to Saudi detainees at Guantanamo Bay; (2) restore the full revision history and talk page.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 08:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have created the redirect, however I do not see an advantage in restoring the revision history/talk page when the article itself does not exist - he has a 2-line mention on the page.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:44, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Restoring the revision history allows contributors to find the references the article used, making it possible to re-use those references in other articles;
 * New references can emerge at any time. Notability is cumulative.  Very few individuals' participation in a single event lifted them to notability -- all by itself.  For almost all the individuals we consider notable their notability was established by considering all the factors which contributed to their notability.  So, when new references emerge, that add another factor that helps establish that individual's notability, it is very helpful to examine the previous history, to make a judgment as to whether the new information is sufficient to push that individual over the boundary into notability.
 * Other administrators have told me they can't follow a suggestion I made. I suggested redirections be protected from editing by anyone but administrators.  They told me protection was only supposed to be in response to vandalism.  If you are concerned that your close will be subverted, and the existence of the revision history will be used to restore the articles to article space, without any meaningful improvements, and you don't share the concern over when administrators are authorized to protect material, go ahead and protect the redirect from editing.
 * Two weeks ago a newbie did take two redirects, and wrote weak and unreferenced articles. Here is the note I left them.  I have no interest in wasting everyone's time introducing, or re-introducing, material that is likely to be deleted, or deleted again.  Geo Swan (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 08:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Docear
Hi Phantomsteve! You may not remember this close, as it was from May 2012. You closed as a merge to another article. In July 2012, a relatively inexperienced editor did almost the exact opposite - they redirected the destination article to the nominated article, and removed your merge tag from the nominated article. This was only just recently discovered. I have since reverted the redirected, and I have restored the merge tag as I do not believe any edits have happened in the intervening period that address the AfD concerns. I did want to bring this to your attention, though, as you were the closing admin, in case you had a different view. Singularity42 (talk) 12:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Singularity42 - thanks for letting me know. Now we just need someone to do the merge! I'm back at work tomorrow, but if I get a chance to look at it next week when I'm next off, I'll see what I can do! Regards,  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 11:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 15:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)