User talk:Robertgombos/Archive 3

Welcome!
Hello, Robertgombos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! DES (talk) 02:25, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Jasmine Directory

 * When you requested a history merge Draft:Jasmine Directory to Jasmine Directory, Draft:Jasmine Directory had only one edit, and that edit was a redirect. There was nothing to history-merge with. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, ! Robertgombos (talk) 05:52, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

DMOZ: How to rescue dead URLs properly
To respond to your request for feedback on changing dead links to archive.org copies in the DMOZ article, yes, rescuing dead URLs is always a good idea and much appreciated. However, that's not the right way to do it. Rather than prepending "https://web.archive.org/web/*/" to the URLs, you should leave the original URL alone, and add the template parameters deadurl, archiveurl, and archivedate. Also, you should use a specific revision of the page from archive.org rather than pointing to the index of revisions. Unless the most recent version of the page doesn't contain the text the citation was referring to, it's generally best to go with the most recent copy archive.org saved, and the date it did so goes in the archivedate parameter (e.g. "2017-03-04" for the URL https://web.archive.org/web/20170304211520/http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/meta/).

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DMOZ&diff=791635197&oldid=791367474 for the format I used in correcting the URLs you changed. In this unusual case, since DMOZ has its own official archive of the last modified version of the site, http://dmoztools.net/, I decided to use that site for the archive links rather than using whatever the most recent copy on archive.org happened to be (and I got the 2017-03-17 archivedate from the top-level "Sorry we're closed" page on http://dmoz.org/).

P.S. I recently watched the '90s Internet education video archived as EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE: TROPICANA IS ON A BUDGET! on YouTube, and I found the bit starting at 1:27 ("...Actually, Pasquale, human-created directories are overtaking search engines in importance and popularity!") as hilariously anachronistic as it was sad. Therefore I'm very happy to learn of your still-active Jasmine Directory, which I had not previously heard of. --Dan Harkless (talk) 14:49, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, . Thank you for the feedback it will be useful. As for the quoted text, yeah, I'm a huge fan of "humans are better than computers" (at some things). Regarding http://dmoztools.net/, I don't think it's the official mirror, yet. On the editor's forum the more experienced programmers are still talking about various features. Anyway, I hope that at least a memory of what DMOZ was will be kept. Robertgombos (talk) 08:24, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Actually, I said "official archive", not "official mirror". I called it that since it's linked to from the new homepage of dmoz.org, and presumably has the latest revision of the site, but yeah, I realize it's only a "semi-official archive".  Hopefully those talks will indeed result in a rebirth of the site, and hopefully the new incarnation will avoid the old problem of suggested links usually being ignored even if relevant (probably due to not enough link-reviewing manpower), while also not suffering from unfettered link-spam.


 * Maybe a good way to go would be to include unreviewed submitted links for each category at the bottom of each page, normally hidden, with appropriate text to click on to reveal them. Presumably a large portion of spammers would be dissuaded by their links normally being invisible, while people who were willing to wade through any spam to find any as yet unreviewed gems in the category would be able to do so.  Then admins could also be given the ability to ban particular domains while rejecting their initially submitted links (either globally, or for particular categories), and then the software would take care of automatically rejecting such links in the future.  For me, having those two features in place would go a long way towards making a link directory more relevant and useful.  --Dan Harkless (talk) 01:04, 22 July 2017 (UTC)


 * , I also made a few suggestions. One of the major issues among webmasters was that they never got any notification about regarding the status of their listing (if it was rejected, especially... because in my opinion many websites were close to meet the inclusion criteria but needed some work). I'd like that feature to be implemented. But I am absolutely positive that the coders will make their best. Robertgombos (talk) 08:24, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted
Hello Robertgombos. Your account has been added to the " " user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk. The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex ShihTalk 06:47, 3 August 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.

About expanding exhibition section
Hello Robert, how are you? Thank you for your quality contributions. I was wondering if you are familiar with this tool. For example, I ran a report of Won Ju Lim and it looks pretty fine. Ideally if you could provide a citation at the end of the parts that were highlighted, that would be appreciated. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 08:20, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Alex, I'm fine, thanks. Will do. Yeah, to those (almost inevitable) issues I was referring to.

Oxford to Cambridge Expressway
I don't understand why you've added a template about unclear citations. Almost every paragraph has a weblink to a proper source.Tomintoul (talk) 08:31, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Tomintoul just make this statement sourced: "Government claims the Oxford to Cambridge corridor is one of the most significant growth areas in the country. Local authorities within the corridor are planning for substantial job and housing growth to support the continued economic development of the region. However, there is currently poor east-west connectivity, resulting in Oxford and Cambridge having better connections to London than each other." I don't contest if is true or not, but it needs a source. Also, it would be cool if you could transform your citation in inline citations. Thanks. Robertgombos (talk) 08:36, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I modified the first reference.Tomintoul. Robertgombos (talk) 08:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, Robert please be careful about copy-vios. Winged Blades Godric 08:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Robert, thanks for your input. Please see if you can see why Winged Blades thinks there has been a copyright violation. Tomintoul (talk) 09:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Take a look at this - I think it's a good ideea to provide a citation at the end of the parts that were highlighted. Copyrighted material is not allowed.
 * If that 13% was the lone case--I would not have CSD-ed it! Actually, Erwig can-not pick pdf-s. Hence, it draws a blank! See this for the report. Winged Blades Godric 09:19, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Winged Blades, well, yeah! :)
 * There has been no copyright infringement. Most of the material is covered under the 'Open Government Licence'. Please refer to the notes on the relevant document which states: You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence.Tomintoul (talk) 09:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, I have reworded the section not covered by the open government licence. Please re-run your copy vio check and remove the tag. Thank you. Tomintoul (talk) 09:54, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio speedy delete
Hi, you've recently tagged a few articles for speedy delete with G12, but they don't seem to be copyright violations. E.g. Tara Cooper, and Iona Rozeal Brown - looking at the copyvios reports for them, they are both "unlikely" to be copyright violations, Tara Cooper is at 2.0%, and Iona Rozeal Brown is at 2.9%. I've left a note at Talk:Iona Rozeal Brown about this, but I just thought I'd ask you about this? Thanks. Seagull123 (talk) 19:13, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure thanks for bringing this up! We should talk about yesterday's reports. If you check the edits history Iona Rozeal Brown has a history of copyrighted material from various sources, and yesterday's copyvio check shows copyrighted content of (51.6%) both from The New York Times and Artspace.com. I removed the copyrighted material originated from Artspace.com, and that's why the new report showed 13.0%. Now, with the removal of NYTimes material as well, the article is down to 5.7%. I'll remove the G12 tag and will mark the article as a stub. ALso, I'll try to develop it (I have just checked and it has enough source coverage and I already added two sources to ref what's left). As for Tara Cooper this is the copyvio's yesterday report (92.2%). Now, in my opinion 92 percent is huge and yes, I considered it necessary to G12 it. I removed the copyrighted content right away and you should of check copyvio rep. for this id: 770374669. I'm going to remove the G12 tag from that article as well. G12 is a bit confusing at times. Thanks! Robert G. (talk) 20:19, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Your new page reviews
Hello, I noticed that you had tagged Jio Pagla with a speedy deletion-test page tag (WP:G2) and Satya (Bhojpuri film 2017) with speedy deletion-no content and db-hoax tags ( WP:A3 and WP:G3). I think those are inappropriate. Please be more careful with your CSD tagging. Thanks, Mduvekot (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, thanks for letting me know. The main contributor of Satya (Bhojpuri film 2017) already removed the speedy deletion tags. The speedy deletion tags were applied to the version I reviewed (795205149), although, it's hard to build notability on a single blogspot reference). About Jio Pagla I think it's a test page and if you consider, maybe the draftspace it's a better place for it.

2 queried pages

 * I have called AfD on these two pages: Articles for deletion/Jio Pagla and Articles for deletion/Satya (Bhojpuri film 2017). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:25, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, ! Robert G. (talk) 09:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Prime Number Distribution Series
Please DO NOT delete Prime Number Distribution Series page until we fully implement it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuclearstrategy8 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, ! I moved your message over here. I do not have deletion rights, I've only nominated Prime Number Distribution Series for sd because it wasn't ready to be published in the article mainspace. I see that now it's in the draftspace, where you can develop it and feel free to publish it when it's ready. Good luck! Robert G. (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Jio Pagla
This page has AfD template and there is a discussion opened for it. There is no any reason, it stays unreviewed. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Got it, ! Thanks!

Valle Caudina
Hi Robertgombos, i decided to create Valle Caudina because I live in Valle Caudina. I saw that some pages in english, which talk about Italy place, there was Valle Caudina write in red because before this page didn't exist. So there isn't any reason to add references, even because there is the Valle Caudina italian page. Anyway if you want some references you can search in this website (online newspaper) ilcaudino.it and usertv.it bye see you soon --Punzogabriele (talk) 15:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Fixed some typos, more improvements might be needed. Thanks! Robert G. (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Adding url
Hi. On August 4 you left this remark on my talk page: "Please place the appropiate url= in your citations" - Your remark concerned this page: Jerzy Luczak-Szewczyk. I thought it was customary to reply on the same page as the remark is done, so on August 6 I wrote this answer on my talk page: "I'm not sure I understand your remark right. Could you please explain which citations you think need URLs? If your remark concerns the notes referring to newspaper articles I can inform you that all of them are taken from the original printed newspapers (= the published paper versions), not from digitally published newspapers. Please excuse me, but as I am a new user I need a clearer explanation of your remark."

As you haven't answered me back I have inserted this copy of my reply here on your talk page. I would appreciate if you could confirm that you have read it and give me an answer to these questions: Do you mean all of the notes, or do you mean those referring to newspapers, or only the quotations in notes 14, 15 and 19? Are you satisfied with the information about where I found the newspaper articles? Best regards Antecknaren (talk) 11:24, 22 August 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.

Telephilia
Took your IndieWire suggestion. Thanks Espngeek (talk)Espngeek
 * You're welcome, Espngeek! Robert G. (talk) 03:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Review of Gokhale Method
Hello, thanks for reviewing the page. Do you think you could also assess its quality on the talk page? I'd appreciate that.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 12:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Farang Rak Tham, done.


 * Start quality, ?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 21:06, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Farang Rak Tham, please feel free to use the community-driven article assessment process at Article_assessment, you can have there a second opinion from health/alternative medicine experts. Robert G. (talk) 23:32, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


 * You mean, ask for assessment on a sleepy hollow wikiproject? Mm. What were your considerations when you assessed start?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 08:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Georg Herold) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Georg Herold, Robertgombos!

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

"Thanks!"

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

Learn more about page curation.

Mduvekot (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Mduvekot, I thank you! ;)

Regarding proposed deletion of Ben Wu
Thank you for the notice that the article would be deleted, as well as for reviewing the page. I wouldn't have noticed otherwise. I've added a few references to the article, is it enough to warrant the deletion message from getting taken down? Mentaikoz (talk) 07:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello Mentaikoz! It's very good that you listed a few references. On Wikipedia every statement you make (especially about a living person) should be referenced by at least an independent reliable source (Facebook, Instagram are not considered reliable sources).

Instead, use Google to find article, news, books that "backup" what you write in the article. If you can't find any reference for a statement. For example, in your article appears "...is a Taiwanese singer, actor and television host." OK. I don't contest that Ben Wu is a Taiwanese singer, actor and television host but I can't either believe it just because there is nothing to backup the statement. If one source that you already mentioned contains this information as well (e.g. Ben Wu is a Taiwanese singer, actor and television host), place the same reference to the end of your first statement as well. Give your original reference a name (e.g.   ) than you can cite the same reference in another context as well if supports it using  . I placed the {citation needed} tag at the end of the statements that should be referenced. I found a reference for the first statement, and cited the same resource to some of the movies you mentioned. I do not understand Chinese, so try to find some more references and if you encounter any problems let me know. Good luck! Robert G. (talk) 08:28, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the well thought out answer and edits! Mentaikoz (talk) 08:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Mentaikoz, you're most welcome! Robert G. (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Rob Wilkinson
Hi Robert, thank you for reviewing Rob Wilkinson article. CASSIOPEIA (talk) 01:33, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello CASSIOPEIA, it was my pleasure seeing how much work and effort you put into creating those articles. All articles have enough references from my point of view. Good job and good luck! Robert G. (talk) 03:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Stub sorting
Please don't use the Stub tag if you can find a more specific stub tag; stub sort whenever you are able. To do otherwise will backlog Category:Stubs. Thank you. (I realize some people aren't able to stub sort very well due to issues surrounding memory or feeling overwhelmed by the unfortunately long list of stub types; sorry if you're one of them). -- I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  03:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, ! Waw, nice signature! Yesterday was indeed a "today-I'll-patroll-all-day". :) I recall I had a cell membrane co-receptor stub and there isn't a specific stub for this, so I ended up using cell-biology-stub. Thanks for the tip, will do my best! Robert G. (talk) 04:05, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Page mover granted
Hello, Robertgombos. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3ARobertgombos granted] the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when  is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:
 * Requested moves
 * Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Alex ShihTalk 07:39, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Alex Shih! Robert G. (talk) 08:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

2009 Nicholls State Colonels football team
Thanks for reviewing and I appreciate the thanks you sent. Spatms (talk) 11:33, 03 September 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Petar Prentović, Robertgombos.

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

"hi the subject of this article does not meet WP:NHOOPS."

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

Domdeparis (talk) 12:27, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Aleksandar Todorović, Robertgombos.

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

"seems to fail WP:NHOOPS and WP:GNG"

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

Domdeparis (talk) 12:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Aurimas Majauskas, Robertgombos.

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

"fails WP:NHOOPS and WP:GNG"

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

Domdeparis (talk) 12:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi there I saw that you unreviewed this page but without removing the notability tag. I could understand you unreviewing it because you disagree with me that he is notable, if that is the case then you should remove the tag. Domdeparis (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Domdeparis, I was just double checking some pages that I reviewed a few hour ago to see if they fail WP:NHOOPS. I suppose most unreviewed basketball related bios will fail WP:NHOOPS (the vast majority are stubs). Cheers. Robert G. (talk) 13:18, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * hi A stub article will not necessarily fail NHOOPS (or other subject specific criteria) so long as there is a mention that he played in one of the criteria validating leagues. There are a load of pro players that do not play in one of those leagues though. But if there are very few references but a mention of playing in a team that is part of the league I tag it as needing more refs but I don't tag as not meeting NSPORTS (because even if they do they also have to meet GNG). The creator of this article has created dozens of pages that fail WP:NHOOPS so I was trawling through them to tag as not meeting notability criteria hence my multiple unreviewing notification!! Cheers. Domdeparis (talk) 13:30, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Domdeparis, yup, I saw. :) Have a nice day! Robert G. (talk) 13:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Mary Spargo
Thank you for your kind words. I agree that the second article that mentions "Mary Spargo" is for another person: I cannot imagine an American of her background and age (born in the early 1900s) getting involved with television in the UK in the 1980s! Cheers --Aboudaqn (talk) 22:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Aboudaqn, cheers! Robert G. (talk) 22:24, 4 September 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) 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.

Orphaned non-free image File:Lamedeleni3.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Lamedeleni3.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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)

DMOZ contributor category
Please see Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 25. – S. Rich (talk) 04:54, 25 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.