User talk:Rasimmons/Archive1

Your addition of Templates to the 'Beijing Queer Festival' page
Hi Rasimmons. May I add my own Welcome to you for joining Wikipedia?

Thank you for your messages on my User talk:Tai kit page about the 'Beijing Queer Film Festival' page that I created late last night. As I mentioned in my reply to you on my User talk page a few minutes ago, I'm sorry that I ran out of time to reply to you early today, after making many changes in line with the guidance contained in your Template. I did/do actually agree with your original Template and the accompanying remarks you placed on my User talk page: frankly, my creation of the page wasn't up to my usual standard. And, in agreeing with those criticisms, and despite being very busy, I have worked very hard today to substantially improve the page. Unfortunately, I really don't agree with your new tag. However, I don't want to leave the page with the Template above it, yet I really don't have time now for consultation with a group of editors!

Much as I appreciate your addition of Templates at the top of the 'Beijing Queer Festival' page, it would really help enormously if you wouldn't mind helping me by improving the page yourself. If that isn't possible, then I think it may perhaps be better if I reluctantly ask the Administrators to delete it, despite the many hours I've already worked on it. In that way, it could perhaps be reintroduced by another editor, sometime in the future? I have been praised recently by other Reviewers for several other pages I have created on the subject of LGBT film festivals, particularly in the under-represented East Asian region, and had intended to create several more. But I'm afraid I'm now beginning to think that it may be better for someone else to now take over. I'm actually feeling quite dispirited now! Very interested to hear your thoughts. Many thanks again. Tai kit (talk) 19:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't really think either of us nessecarily need to be the ones to improve the article. The tag is simply there to remind editors and viewers that some improvements could be made. I'm not requesting deletion by any means. Would it be acceptable to apply a different tag that we can agree on and leave it on the article until it is improved? I will certainly make it my aim to improve the article where I can, although I am often too busy for very substantial edits. My sincerest apologies if I've made your editing difficult at all. R. A. S immons Talk 20:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your considered reply. Yes, I think your suggestion may be a good one for now. I've also suggested another possible solution below. I think I should have been clearer: I didn't mean to imply that you're requesting deletion. Rather, that is my (reluctant) preference, if no consensus can be reached between editors, within a reasonable period of time, that the problem has been resolved. Of course, I realise the decision isn't mine to make, but I would really prefer that the problem is fixed within an agreed timescale, and that if that subsequently proves impossible, that the Administrators are then asked to step in and delete the page so that another editor has the chance to create a new version, untainted by an apparently inadequate current version. I'm just not keen on the possibility of it sitting there for weeks or months, with nobody available to produce an acceptable version, and a Template reproachfully reminding the current editor(s) that the content remains unacceptable. I think that would have the effect of destroying the article's credibility and discourage its use as a trusted source of information. In some cases, that would only be fair, but I don't think it applies in this case.

As I've said, I think your original labelling was right, and I am very grateful for that. However, in the process of what I think has been, first, my successful removal of 'weasel words' and potentially loaded phrasing, and second, the provision of a now adequate number of References for the size of the article, I believe the apparent lack of neutrality has also now been successfully dealt with. So I think an even better solution could be that, rather than removing the Template now, if you would please consider instead listing the words or phrases (or even whole sentences!) that have given rise to your concerns about the article's lack of neutrality, to enable me to try to put the problem right myself.

To digress: Ideally, the standards of objectivity and balance I would one day like to achieve would be those of my favourite US newscasters/journalists of modern times, such as Scott Pelley of CBS News, or the late Peter Jennings of ABC News (perhaps even one of the 'legendary' ones of times past, such as Ed Murrow, John Chancellor or even Walter Cronkite)— or on this side of the Atlantic, presenter/journalists such as the BBC's David Dimbleby or Peter Snow, ITN's late Alastair Burnet, Matt Frei, Andrew Neil or perhaps Mishal Husain of BBC News.

I hope you can consider my suggestion, so that this problem can then be "put to bed" — at least for now! I look forward to your reply. Many thanks again.

Tai kit (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Actually, upon another review, the article is quite a bit more neutral than I must have earlier thought. I was reading quickly and probably misread and misinterpreted some things. It's entirely my fault. Don't worry about it. Feel totally free to remove the tag; I don't think it's warranted anymore. I really appreciate your dedication to neutrality and accuracy. R. A. S immons Talk 02:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm very grateful and frankly feel enormously relieved. I'll remove the tag within the next few minutes. As I say, I think your original labelling was right, and as the creator of the article, I felt a duty to make substantial improvements to it, and to maintain Wikipedia's high standards of accuracy, fairness and objectivity. I now feel the hours expended on producing and then improving the page have not been in vain, and feel enthused to create new Wikipedia pages on the subject in the near future. Thank you for all the time you've spent in reviewing and helping to improve the article too, and for recognising my dedication to neutrality and accuracy: an attribute that you very clearly share. Tai kit (talk) 16:27, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of W;Wikipedia:Meetup/UK/ArtAndFeminism 2016/Institute for Contemporary Arts
Hello, you nominated this for deletion as not containing encyclopedic content, but it's an event page under Meetup I was using to introduce a new editor and help them build their event. Please can you remove the nomination. Thanks Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 16:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC) Oh, never mind, I see the problem now, as there's an unnecessary "W:" being inserted upon creation. Pharos has kindly moved the page. Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 16:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries, I removed the deletion template after I realised the issue myself. Thanks for notifying me, though. R. A. S immons Talk 16:19, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Youth Players Rule (ANFP)
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Youth Players Rule (ANFP) &mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:46, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jade (drum and bass producer, DJ)
Dear Rasimmons, you've tagged the page seen in the title for speedy deletion. I'd like to solve the issue and I've already contested the deletion but did not get any further notifications and the page got deleted. You've stated that the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important. Many drum and bass producers are present on Wikipedia, I wanted to provide knowledge and information about "Jade" as well, he has a major contribution to the field especially in the neurofunk genre with his record label "EATBRAIN". If you require evidence or you have further questions please contact me so we can solve the problem. Thank you.

Shelly silas (talk) 15:30, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

National portrait gallery
Hi there thanks for your comments that reference  : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cundall,_Downes_%26_Co_%C2%A9_National_Portrait_Gallery,_London

Do you know how I can delete this page created by accident.

Jake Jakecollingwood (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Jake. It's already been deleted. I appreciate your interest in resolving the issue. R. A. S immons Talk 19:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Suggestions taken
Thank you for your suggestions, I'll look into it and make sure to complete the (Jade drum and bass producer, DJ) article, provide reliable third-party evidence of the subject's notability and Sandbox it. Thanks again.

Shelly silas (talk) 21:42, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'm glad we've got it worked out. R. A. S immons Talk 01:32, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank You for the Tip
If it is a promotional article, by all means, it should be deleted.I did not know: I am new to Wikipedia. Also, I accidentally named it oddly, I meant to name it just Siddharth Shankar Singh. Thank you.

Sid3013 (talk) 16:00, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Sid3013

deleting ARMAAN GOLDEN PINE award
dear Rasimmons ARMAAN GOLDEN PINE award is a wellknown non-governmental environmental award in IRAN, and its recipients are great international scientists like prof.Abbaspour, prof.Mirbagheri and prof.Hessabi. I am a Ph.D. in environmetal engineering myself and know this award very well. the article has enough resources and it will be your kindness to clearly remind its problems or any ambiguities. thank you and wish to hear from you soon. regards MohsenAman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohsenaman (talk • contribs) 10:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mathews Taapopi Hamutenya


A tag has been placed on Mathews Taapopi Hamutenya, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Natangwe.Namando (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC) This page is not unambiguously promotional, because this is just a page about a living person, the content of this article does not promote any business. Please let me know if I need to add something to my article if it violate some Wiki rules. Thank you --Natangwe.Namando (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Authorspress, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Creative. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Supplementaire hair system
Hi, I registered with my name, cuz that's how people know me and doesn't saw a problem with it. As a person involved in developing the supplementaire back in 1996 I didn't saw a problem to share my knowledge about it. I'm totally fine if there is someone who can add more information or to edit the one I've added so it doesn't be so promotional (which I consider to be not right. There isn't "do it", "try it" or how good it is - but just an information about it), at this point I really don't have the time. You say to stop editing the page - sorry for my respond to your first message - I tried to remove anything that could be considered as promotion, so my time doesn't be just lost when I wanted to share some knowledge with people with Alopecia or baldness. Probably you have no idea what it is to have such problem and how other people see you just because of your problem, but I've seen it and they need more knowledge and information so they decide to do something like this, a small change that give them confidence.

I would be glad if you try to help me improve the article but not only report it. It's how people grow - they've helped each other. Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CochraneCo (talk • contribs) 14:51, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Southern Hills Aquifer
I notice you do a lot of reviewing new pages. Can you take a look at this one: Southern Hills Aquifer for me? I wrote it a few days ago but didn't bother going through AfC because of the lag time involved. Thanks for the assistance. H.dryad (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything wrong with it, although everything could always use more sources. It doesn't seem to make any outrageous claims without valid sourcing or anything, so it's alright by my estimation. R. A. S immons Talk 18:48, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for your attention. H.dryad (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
I am new and I just wanted to try out with some people that have yet to be touched by the community, but how do I delete it? Hai ate us! (talk) 02:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If you want Allanda Smith to be deleted, you can just say so and I can change the current speedy deletion tag on the page to a G7 tag. However, it will probably be deleted anyway, as it is. It's really up to you. R. A. S immons Talk 02:23, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

RfA
Rasimmons, please do not argue with editors about their votes in an RfA. This is just the first day of a seven day period and comments like those you posted should not be repeated during this week as it only hurts the candidate and disrupts the process. If you want to have more involved discussion about the candidate's editing strengths or weaknesses, please take it to the RfA talk page. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 22:04, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Stefan Stokic
I'm not sure why this page was deleted, he's one of 3 people working at Lowercase Capital which has had the largest return on a fund ever(over 6000x). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilozxc (talk • contribs) 04:22, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If that's the case, could you provide a source for that? I'm leaving the same message on the article's talk page, so reply there. R. A. S immons Talk 04:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Please Delete Weescript automation
Hi, Could you please delete the Weescript automation page? I must of been editing while you added some tags but I noticed that I have made some errors in the main title so think it best to remove and I will continue to use the sandbox until I get get this closer to a article inline with the rules — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitchellfranklin (talk • contribs) 22:32, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not a full-blown administrator, so I can't delete the page, but I can add a speedy deletion tag. Also, I'm impressed. Most new editors go nuts when their pages get deleted. Thanks for being reasonable and understanding about it. R. A. S immons Talk 23:12, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

ABC of Chairmanship
Rasimmons, thanks for the immediate comment on the initial content, and I agree the page currently lacks supporting references. Here at the University of Cambridge I have colleagues (not me, I'm the tech literate one) that are researching in depth the pre-war government and union labour relationships in the UK and within that context the Citrine book is an important artifact. The page will be updated substantially in the next day or two to the standard we'd expect. rgds Bravo two one (talk) 08:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, . I appreciate it. It seems like the article has potential. R. A. S immons Talk 21:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Article talk pages
Saw your ping at Oath Keepers. Would you be willing to consider avoiding extending the behavioral discussion in Article Talk: space? It seems to have died down and I would rather it not be kicked up again. Happy to discuss any aspects of the interactions at a different location (my talk, your talk, his talk, a noticeboard; basically anywhere except article talk). Thanks! VQuakr (talk) 20:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, I'll leave a User Talk message with and discuss it there. Thanks. R. A. S immons Talk  20:18, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Now that I look at it, I probably don't need to. I found the diffs and so forth in his block discussions, where he more clearly explains the harassment claims. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 20:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi, thank you for pointing out that the page sounds promotional in places.

Could you help me identify some of the parts or sources that sound that way, as I was trying to be as objective as possible and only wrote descriptions based on what external sources has said.

Thank you,

CMLBailey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmlbailey (talk • contribs) 14:39, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Some of the terms in the article, such as "views itself as complementary" and "a strong mission and asset lock" strike me as somewhat slanted. The entire "Product offerings" section seems to be very promotional of the service. One of the references is to a Turn2Us publication, and as Turn2Us isn't independent of the subject of the article, it probably isn't good to use it as a source. While some of the sources are certainly reliable, there seem to be many references to different articles by the same groups, which strikes me as dubious. Furthermore, some of the articles simply include trivial mentions of Fair for You. I think that the trivial mention sources and the Turn2Us source should be removed. Anything from the other sources seems fine, but the language should be a bit more neutral.

about page creating
Hi! This is Madhu, i would like to create the page. can u assist me?. ಲವ್ ಯು ಪೂ (talk) 14:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . I'm actually not a very experienced editor here on Wikipedia. You might be better off reading some of the important essays and guidelines on Wikipedia, such as this guide for creating your first article. I'm flattered that you would ask for my help, though. Thank you. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 20:51, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

page
Anyway Thanks... ಲವ್ ಯು ಪೂ (talk) 03:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Camp Market, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ASCOM. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 16:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Archiving
I fixed your last edit where you tried to add archiving. it should work now. Frietjes (talk) 14:12, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks a lot. I couldn't tell if I'd done it right, but I appreciate you fixing it. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 18:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Octane (Marketing Technology)
Hello R. A. Simmons, Thanks for your suggestion. Can you please help me with these errors? How can i fix them? Thanks in advance. Caroline A. Murphy (talk) 09:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

editing Shakeel Begg
Hi, you wrote: This article seems to cast its subject in an extremely negative light without enough context for readers to develop a fair opinion on him. It would be best to change the language to be a little more neutral.

I guess it's hard to be neutral about an Islamic extremist who preaches what Begg does! As a centrist, you'll agree I guess. Anyway, is the article better now?

Have you yourself ever created an article from scratch, that I can learn from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CanterburyUK (talk • contribs) 21:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It can be hard to be neutral about some subjects, but it is our responsibility as editors to write an objective encyclopedia and not subjective editorial. I appreciate your understanding and willingness to fix the article. It does seem better as far as neutrality goes. I appreciate it. As for your question regarding my articles: no, I haven't yet written any articles myself and I admire your dedication in doing so. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 17:12, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Billie Untermann
Hi, Rasimmons. I appreciate your revision of the page Billie Untermann. I am new to the editing and I understand that there is no clear reason for her inclusion into the encyclopedia. If possible, would I be able to make some changes to include her significance before deletion? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by R.bosman (talk • contribs) 03:00, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, R.bosman. If you can provide sources that make the subject meet Wikipedia's criteria for the notability of academics, then the article won't be speedy deleted. If there aren't any sources that make the subject notable, then the article will meet criteria for deletion. Does that answer your question? <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 03:48, 3 November 2016 (UTC)


 * That is not what CSD A7 is for, that is the criteria for an AfD debate. I have just declined a number of your incorrect speedy nominations (and other admins have also declined them) and have to formally warn you that if I decline another one this evening, I will have to consider blocking you to avoid further disruption. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  20:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Not to be standoffish, but it seems that you've misread WP:CSS. I misspoke in my talk page discussion, and discussed notability when I meant to discuss significance. While I suppose an argument could be made that the claim of Billie Untermann's directorship of the Utah Field House is a claim of significance, it's still quite thin. As for other articles that you removed my speedy tags from today, George Bingham Rollins being related to a notable person does not amount to a claim of significance, Doris Crump Bradshaw's involvement with the American Association of University Women does not make for a claim of significance, and Anita Lyons Bond did not make a credible claim of significance until you removed my speedy tag and added the claim of significance after the fact. Maybe I'm reading the rules wrong, but your threat of a ban seems a bit much, especially since one of the articles that you're calling me out for only passes A7 since you edited it. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 22:48, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Upon closer inspection of some essays on A7 and the page on Crump Bradshaw, I will admit that there is probably a credible claim there in the political involvement. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 22:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Basically, as I described to another editor the other day, the purpose of CSDs are to save time at AfD, and hence A7s are for articles that would be completely and utterly impossible for anyone to "rescue" at AfD. By contrast, earlier today I deleted an article which was basically a high school yearbook entry, which can never be realistically made into an encyclopedia article, ever. But if an article looks like it could be improved or otherwise salvaged, it's not an A7. Above you write, "especially since one of the articles that you're calling me out for only passes A7 since you edited it", which I think shows misunderstanding of the deletion policy. If the article was a genuine A7, I could not have edited it to "pass", it would have been impossible.


 * Also, remember that AfDs have outcomes that includes "redirect" and "merge" - in this case, Rollins and Bradshaw might at least be able to stay as a redirect to their respective articles linked in the prose, which needs to be decided at a full AfD debate. A7 also means, "not even so much a redirect, thanks".


 * You may be interested to read Field guide to proper speedy deletion and WP:NEWT, an old project to check NPP results.


 * Finally, I certainly wasn't proposing to ban you, only advising you that if you carried on without discussion, a block might become necessary. A block is not a ban (plus as we're discussing, a block isn't required), it's just a way of stopping something disruptive while we investigate it, most non-vandalism blocks are very short anyway - no longer than absolutely necessary. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  23:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I see your point. I'll make sure to be more careful in my tagging of articles in the future. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 23:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Rasimmons!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em;height:173px;border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! Rasimmons, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Donner60 (talk) 23:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

New page reviewer granted
Hello Rasimmons. Your account has been added to the " " user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk. The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. -- Samtar talk &middot; contribs 14:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
 * Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
 * Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

NPR
I will be discussing with the administrator his decision to accord you this right. In the meantime, as a relative newbie here, perhaps you could clue up on how Wikipedia is run before you start throwing your weight around and telligg dmins what to  do. Non admin comments at PERM are not  invited. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I would advise you to read WP:BOLD. Newbie or not, Wikipedia is very much about equality and neutrality, and I believe it is my right to ask any administrator to clarify a decision if it confuses me. It seems as if you are also forgetting to assume good faith. I attempt to be courteous and understanding with all of my edits, while it seems that you are bashing me for my good-faith behaviour. Regarding you statement that "Non admin comments at PERM are not invited", that is blatantly false. As a matter of fact, the front page of WP:PERM explicitly states that "Any editor may comment on requests for permission". Please, couldn't we be civil? Thanks. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 22:34, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As a relative newcomer, you seem to be doing a lot of 'advising'. There is a difference between making a comment and laying down the law to seasoned admins. That's not really the way to get a reputation for friendly collaboration and you're likely, as in any workplace, to get as good as you give. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:44, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * How is it that I am 'advising'? All I have done (that you've been involved in, at least), is ask for clarification regarding decisions that didn't make sense to me or seemed inconsistent. That isn't really wikilawyering, which, according to its page,
 * "refers to certain quasi-legal practices, including:
 * Using formal legal terms in an inappropriate way when discussing Wikipedia policy
 * Abiding by the letter of a policy or guideline while violating its spirit or underlying principles
 * Asserting that the technical interpretation of the policies and guidelines should override the underlying principles they express
 * Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions".
 * As far as I know, I haven't really done any of those things. Whereas you have most certainly been biting, (referring to new editors as "children" and the like), and misinterpreting the rules you reference while attempting to "lay down the law" (see immediately above). Now I might be lawyering a little. My apologies. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 22:58, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I got the Page Curation system developed in  2012, and I rolled out  the Reviewer user right  in  November last  year. The tone with  which  you  began at  the Curation  talk  page set  you  off on the wrong foot. To tell me I misunderstand what  New Page Review is all about clearly  demonstrated that  that  you  certainly  didn't understand it  at  all, and hadn't  bothered to  even notice that  there is a nav tab bar (which I  also  designed) to  all  the pages about  about it (most  of which  I  also  wrote) and you  didn't  explore. As far as biting  newbies is concerned, it  apparently suits you  to  be a 'bitten'  newbie when one puts you  in  your  place, but elsewhere you  act as if you  own the place.  I think  we should leave it  at  that - it's one of the reasons why  I'm  handing  over and retiring  soon.  People  with  attitudes have driven me way from  my  10  long  years here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand that your 10 years of service here have surely made you jaded. I'm sure that you also expect a certain degree of respect for that service, and I most certainly do respect that. I don't mean to seem uncivil or disrespectful towards you. My apologies if I have come off as overbearing or as if I "own the place". I don't mean to have an attitude, either. I hope you can understand that and we can get along as editors until you retire (which will be a shame). Anyway, as there is no real dispute anymore, I suppose we have nothing further to discuss. Thank you for your input as an experienced editor on my conduct. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 02:26, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Coffee. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Effects of sex in the media, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 08:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer revoked
Following an audit of your page reviews, I have revoked the  flag from your account. Two of the errors, including a missed copyright violation (that you absolutely should have checked for before hitting the button), were clear indications that you do not have the requisite experience for this flag yet. You may feel free to re-apply in 90 days time at WP:PERM to have the permission returned, after demonstrating a more thorough understanding of our policies here through your edits. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 08:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you please, per my request, provide diffs? Thank you. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 08:24, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you possibly provide me with the name of the second page? I'm sure I'll have some recollection. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 08:24, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

And, not really relevant to the topic hand, but relevant on the grand scale, you probably won't see me re-applying. The attitude of your project is to discourage those who would help you, rather than encourage their efforts (if often misled). Between Kudpung's harassment of me for even obtaining the right (I'm sure he will be just too overjoyed to hear of this development) and seeing the way you treat applicants, I almost rescinded the right myself. Truly, there are few editors on this site who could possibly live up to your expectations. I obviously made a mistake or two. I had intended to leave all of my new patrols unreviewed, but I clearly missed some. I really didn't want to give you guys the satisfaction, but oh well. The direction of NPP is clear in the way you've handled this. Rather than be clear and explain what editors who have made mistakes have done wrong, you kick them off with no warning and a borderline uncivil shaming. At this rate, I'm afraid that your dream team of "perfect" editors is doomed to wallow in complaints of "muh backlog" for all eternity. I would like to thank Samtar for affording me the right (if obviously mistaken and short-lived). I'm afraid that I probably won't be needing it anymore, as it is obvious that there is no chance of the NPP backlog ever being cleared at this rate due to such a hostile community. <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 08:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4
Hello ,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just reviews, the  backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

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

Backlog update: Technology update:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
 * Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.
 * Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Page Curation/Suggested improvements
 * The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
 * User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
 * User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:
 * Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

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

Backlog update: Technology update: General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
 * has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.
 * The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
 * Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
 * 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.

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

Backlog update: Technology update: General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
 * Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!
 * The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: 
 * On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
 * Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
 * 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.

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

Backlog update: Technology update: General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
 * We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.
 * Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.
 * The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
 * 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.

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.

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)

Your signature
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated  tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change
 * : <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk

to
 * : <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk

—Anomalocaris (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Done. <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 05:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry, I forgot to escape the, so you lost the nonbreaking space. If you want the nonbreaking space, change your signature from
 * : <font face="times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk


 * to
 * : <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk


 * That returns you to what you had before; the line can't break just before "Talk". If you want the signature to always appear on one line, do it this way:


 * : <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk


 * But then, it's usual on the Internet to end links at the ends of words and not link the space following a word, so what I really recommend is this:


 * : <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk


 * In Preferences, the second tab is Appearance, where you can choose the Skin. If you choose Minerva Neue, links are not underlined except when you mouse over them, so the underlining of the space after "Simmons" isn't visible. With any other skin, the different underlining between my final version and all the others should be visible. — <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk Anomalocaris (talk) 05:53, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I went with your last recommendation, it seems to work fine. Also, you seem to have turned into me since your last post. <span style="font-family: times, serif">R. A. S immons Talk 06:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! ... Oops, I'm me again, sorry! —Anomalocaris (talk) 07:39, 23 January 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.

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.

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) 20:35, 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.

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.

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)

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)

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

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

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)

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)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our  Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but  there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software. Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello ,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently Special:ListUsers/patroller New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello ,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000 at the end of May.
 * Backlog status

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
 * Backlog drive

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
 * TIP – New school articles

There is a new template available,, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
 * Misc

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
 * Notes

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022
Hello ,

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators and, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.
 * Backlog status

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.


 * Coordination: and  have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out.  will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.


 * Open letter to the WMF: The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.


 * TIP - Reviewing by subject: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.


 * New reviewers: The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message
Hi ,

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.
 * Invitation

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022
Hello , Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to ), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also. Software news: and  have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved. Suggestions:
 * There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
 * Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
 * Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
 * This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog: Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023
Hello , The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day. won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!
 * Backlog
 * 2022 Awards

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from  to  '''

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as and  have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.


 * Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023
Hello , Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by  and  with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of, and also some patches from , has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders
 * Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and on IRC.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New pages patrol needs your help!
Hello , The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:
 * There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by using  at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter
Hello ,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive
<div style="border: 2px solid #484898; background: #FFF; background-color:#98FB98; padding: 1ex 1ex 1ex 1.5ex; margin: 0px 0px 1em 1em; font-size: 99%"> Hello Rasimmons:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!

The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello ,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)