User talk:Rosguill/Archive 26

Dean single
Hi! Thanks for reviewing Dean single. I have a second email that says you changed the page, but there were no diffs, and nothing shows in the page history. Do you know why this would be?--Verbarson (talk) 09:33, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , hm, not sure what that could be about. The only action I took at Dean single was to mark it reviewed. signed,Rosguill talk 15:50, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The second email came about 1 minute after the first, and I give it below, except that the three URLs were actual links, and the customary end matter is omitted. It was completely missing the usual 'To view this change...' and 'For all changes since...' sections and diffs.

Dear Verbarson,

The Wikipedia page Dean single has been changed on 17 June 2021 by Rosguill, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_single for the current revision.

Editor's summary: -

Contact the editor: mail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/Rosguill wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rosguill

There will be no other notifications in case of further activity unless you visit this page while logged in. You could also reset the notification flags for all your watched pages on your watchlist.

Your friendly Wikipedia notification system
 * This is a mystery rather than a problem, but I am not completely happy that something is sending off emails stating that you have done something that you have not. Unless there's a bug in the review code that is sending a null change email as well as the review notification?--Verbarson (talk) 17:25, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , that is quite odd and this is the first time I've seen something like it. My guess is that it's an edge case for the notification settings you've enabled. If you feel up to it, you can follow the instructions here to file a bug report. signed,Rosguill talk 17:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * This seems to describe the behaviour, though I'm not sure of the jargon.--Verbarson (talk) 19:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , yeah, I think you're right. By any chance did the bug repeat after the other redirect of yours that I just reviewed? signed,Rosguill talk 21:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , yes. Second email within a minute of the first, same pattern as before.--Verbarson (talk) 22:04, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Please delete JSON page
User:Eatcha/Sentry.json, than you -- Eatcha 20:04, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , sorry, as the contents of the page are related to the current AE discussion, I don't feel comfortable taking action here. signed,Rosguill talk 21:43, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, I have applied Db-userreq on its talk-page. The page had nothing to do with the dispute but was used by a script to check If the world "communalism" was removed by the accuser, but now I won't editing here so the page serves no purpose. I understand that you are involved in the AE therefore you don't want to get involved. Thank you -- Eatcha 15:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Should I proceed or not?
You know best and I think I need your advice. There’s a relatively new user who has thus far “shown good faith” but as kind individuals(both of us are, who have trusted editors that turned out to be bad faith editors) I’m unsure about this, they have asked me to teach them our methods of identifying UPE/COI. They have promised me they aren’t a bad faith editor, but only seek to help out, i really want to help out but as we all know, talk is cheap. I’m in a catch-22 scenario, do you think I should not teach them at all or do you think I should just teach them very basic non sophisticated methods of detecting UPE? Honestly any advice you can give me would be more than welcome. Celestina007 (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , how new is the editor? I think that people generally react well if you just clearly tell them that you're not comfortable sharing this information with new editors and that it's nothing personal. signed,Rosguill talk 16:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 5 months, the same user who just got denied NPR rights, ironically it was I who AGF’ed and suggested that I can teach them a few tricks, (I saw a zeal in them against UPE) In any case I have taught them nothing sophisticated as of now, but given them only WP:ADMASQ as a compass, talking with you right now I’m not sure I should continue at all, or in the very least, perhaps I’d just teach them only basic stuff and wait a year before showing them the artillery. Celestina007 (talk) 16:40, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I would trust your judgment here; holding off for a while before showing advanced techniques sounds reasonable. signed,Rosguill talk 16:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds Plausible. I’d do just that. Celestina007 (talk) 16:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Engordany in European football
Hi Rosguill, I changed the redirect from modification to long name, just a question, would I use or  for Engordany in European football (redirect) leading to UE Engordany in European football (page)? Mwiqdoh (talk) 17:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , that would be R from short name, from a shorter name to a longer name. signed,Rosguill talk 17:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. Mwiqdoh (talk) 17:28, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

WP:NPPS request
I wish to do the NPPS and I am not going to do it to collect hats. Could you please create the NPPS page? Dr Salvus 23:45, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , is there anything you'd like to focus on, or did you want to do the full course? signed,Rosguill talk 23:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I will do the full course Dr Salvus 00:15, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , here you go User:Rosguill/Dr Salvus NPPSCHOOL signed,Rosguill talk 00:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I will start tomorrow. Dr Salvus 00:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * How many types of courses are there? Dr Salvus 17:28, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , for editors who know that they only need to work on certain types of work associated with new page reviewing, I focus the course on that work. Other tutors also have different teaching methods. signed,Rosguill talk 17:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I am interested to review only soccer-related articles. Is there a course who deals with this topic? <b style="font-family: Verdana; color: #6633FF;">Dr</b> <b style="font-family: Verdana; color: #6633FF;">Salvus</b> 17:40, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , not really, new page review tasks are largely the same across subject matter. By certain types of work, I meant things like assessing notability vs. neutrality vs. idenfigying copyvio, etc. signed,Rosguill talk 18:01, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Reverted to stable version
and had destroyed many caste articles to do their POV pushing in order to glorify Rajput caste. Though, i don't edit all of the articles they were editing or they had interest in. But, I have reverted some of the highly controversial articles to last stable version, when they were not touched by those editors. As per your comment while closing WP:ANI report, i have found issues in their edits. Hence, i took this step and felt the need to inform you in order to avoid further disruption in this area. Heba Aisha (talk) 23:39, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Bruno Mars&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 23:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Jeremiah Lisbo&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 21:30, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Justin Trudeau&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 12:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

POV question re: Paschal Baylón
Hello Rosguill,

I see you placed the POV template on the article for Paschal Baylón back in December 2019, but looking at the article, it's not clear what the neutrality issue is/was. The only dispute I see listed on the relatively quiet talk page is from another user who questioned the source for the reasoning behind his given name. There is no apparent mention of anything approaching a neutrality dispute. Was there a relevant discussion that somehow got deleted?

Would you agree that it's time to remove the template from the article, given that two of the three conditions for removal would seem to be met? If so, you can do it, or I can, but I wanted to reach out to you first, since you placed the template.

Thanks, 1980fast (talk) 19:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , mm, in my assessment there's neutrality issues throughout the article, consistently praising Baylón and presenting him in a positive light, rather than a neutral one. The article is also overly reliant on sources affiliated with the Catholic Church; this is unavoidable given the subject matter, but we should be especially careful about not importing those sources' POV into Wikipedia's voice. Positive anecdotes such as [his companions] respected his pious nature and his virtue, Paschal was very honest..., The humble friar never wasted food... should only be included if third-party sources have related them; accounts of miracles at his grave need to be properly attributed instead of being related in Wikipedia's voice, etc. signed,Rosguill talk 19:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I made some changes to remove content that I was unable to verify, but still think that the article needs further work to reach neutrality. signed,Rosguill talk 19:53, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

ACE ranked choice voting
Hi Rosguill: you were the #3 support for the 2020 ACE proposal on ranked-choice voting (Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020). As the proposer has since been globally locked, I'm writing to remind you that the 2021 ACE RFC will begin in two months, so if this is a proposal you wish to explore, you should consider beginning the technical work on developing the proposal and any related technical systems now. Best, KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 20:07, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the heads up. I'm not sure I'll be able to commit to doing much work to develop the proposal but I'll try to keep tabs on it and may be able to support other editors. signed,Rosguill talk 20:14, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Primary sources on Chetana Nagavajara
Hi Rosguill! A month ago, I started the article and received a primary source tag from you. Please kindly see if this can now be removed. Many thanks. --Taweetham (talk) 08:09, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --Taweetham (talk) 03:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Natalie Portman&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 01:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Trialpears
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg AGK • Eliz81 • Mulad • ThaddeusB • Vianello • Who
 * Pictogram voting rename.png →

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Ragesoss



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg AGK • DGG

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg AGK

Guideline and policy news
 * Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
 * An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news
 * IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration
 * The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

ArchiveSent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Renu Raj
Hello, I've once removed the COI tag from Renu Raj which was placed by, see. Someone else also removed the COI tag before me, look. But German kitty is doing the same process (tagging undisclosed payment tag) again and again. This is vandalism, right? 27.59.238.4 (talk) 07:18, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * 27.59.238.4 is shopping around to Administrators and at Teahouse to get the UPE/COI tag permanently removed from Renu Raj by accusing GermanKity of vandalism. At Teahouse, Germankity has raised the possibility that 27.59.238.4 is an IP for User:Idhachu, the editor who created the article originally, subsequently blocked as sock. David notMD (talk) 11:43, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I've semi-protected the article. It should probably go to AFD though. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:52, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Now at Articles for deletion/Renu Raj. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:06, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Looking for some advice
Hi Rosguill, thanks for your comment at WP:RFP/NPR:. I'd like to learn from this. Can you talk me through what you were seeing that led you to the conclusion that Draft:Marvin Ramirez and Peyman Esmaeili had UPE issues? Many thanks, Laplorfill (talk) 20:15, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , both articles were created by a new account with no edits to other topics, primarily in a single edit, which indicates that the text may have been copied from somewhere else (common for PR work, although by itself not a conclusive piece of evidence). In the case of Peyman Esmaeili, the article's text comes off as rather promotional, and is primarily supported by citations to interviews, which tend to be low quality sources. For Draft:Marvin Ramirez, the article creator's user name, "Talentoxtremo1", suggests a promotional talent agency ("Extreme Talent" in Spanish). signed,Rosguill talk 20:20, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, Rosguill, that's extremely helpful. I'll watch out carefully for patterns like this in the future. Laplorfill (talk) 00:45, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Mentorship
Before I expand into why, would you @Rosguill be open for mentorship right now? J-Man11 (talk) 18:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I was pinged to a discussion where this was suggested, so I think I already have a guess as to why you're requesting this. That having been said, I'm unfamiliar with your editing work as well as what you are specifically seeking help doing, so I'm curious to know what kind of editing work you're interested in getting help with so that I can assess whether or not I'm a good fit to help you. signed,Rosguill talk 18:44, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You would be correct. Though there are several areas where I personally want to improve in, two areas specifically have caused a lot of ruckus.  The main area is with primary versus secondary sources.  While the second area is, though I have been able to fix quite a bit recently following advise is backing off of 2020/21 articles.  I originally wanted to do these because I wanted to provide a picture of some modern armed forces as they appear now.  However, this of course has issues because finding 100% up-to-date information is pretty tough, and honestly just not reliable and pointless looking back now.  Though I have removed these following advice from @Buckshot06, these have most definitely left a stain in his head with regard to me in this area.  Not only can I see how this is an issue after he calmly explained it, but I see that I was very wrong is even assuming I would be able to make these articles with proper referencing.  Which brings me to the second main flaw, referencing.  I only recently started understanding the difference between primary and secondary sourcing, which I now feel I have under control.  However, many of the articles last month used many primary sources, which was when I didn't understand the difference between the two.  I've only also now realised how important WP:SYNTH is, again, only realising what this is following Buckshot's comments.
 * So, what's the point in asking you? Well, I understand Buckshot's concerns, and after he finally calmly explained and linked me to the areas which I needed to read (Primary/Second, Synth, and Notability), I feel I do have a better grasp, but of course you can never get rid of the past.  So, instead I'm looking to the future and looking around for a Mentor to help, especially in the area of proper referencing, and would request you/they check all drafts/sandboxes when it's time to transfer them into the main space.  This is something which I've wanted for a while, but only recently @Thewolfchild directed me to you and the actual page for mentors through which I was directed to you. J-Man11 (talk) 19:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the explanation. Unfortunately I don't think that I can commit to reviewing all of your prospective article creations, although I would be open to answering questions regarding specific passages that you're concerned about in a given article. Would that be a mentorship model that you would be amenable to? signed,Rosguill talk 19:15, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe @Buckshot06 would be able to answer that better than myself. Especially considering recently I've considered him a mentor, but I'm also driving him crazy because of my past mistakes.  Personally, I really think any help from both of you would be astonishing, but as @Thewolfchild has stated, and I think he's right, a full time mentor would probably be the best.  J-Man11 (talk) 19:17, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * To continue on the conversation from a month ago, my main issue (and still remains this now) is using primary sources too much. In addition just the simple stuff like where references go in a sentence, and how to to submit a draft for review before posting (something which I've used in the past, but always take about 2 months to actually do).  So put it simply, the simple stuff plus some expansions on the basic things. J-Man11 (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , addressing the first area you identified, do you find you have trouble identifying primary sources from secondary ones? signed,Rosguill talk 18:15, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd say about 80% of the time I can't tell the difference. The basics I'm aware of are, a publishing from a government/ministry source is primary, while a secondary source is something like a book written by someone in said group/formation, etc.  Though, I still have a hard time deciphering still. J-Man11 (talk) 18:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , so, I think the first thing to clarify is the definition of a primary source. A primary source is a source that either has a direct connection to the topic in question, or which provides information about a topic without any analysis, whereas a secondary source has both distance from the topic, and provides independent analysis. Additionally, old sources generally require additional interpretation, so a sufficiently old secondary source may also be treated as a primary source (the definition of "old" varies by topic, but generally anything older than 100 years should not be accepted at face value).
 * So with that in mind, let's say that we're adding content to Battle of Verdun. Examples of primary sources would be:
 * Letters or oral accounts by soldiers involved in the battle
 * Field reports of casualties
 * Statements made by the German or French governments
 * Secondary sources would be:
 * Books or academic papers written by subject-matter experts after the battle
 * Articles in reliable general interest magazines or newspapers in the 21st century
 * An example of a source containing both primary and secondary content would be an article that includes both independent analysis and extensive direct quotations from a source tied to the event; the information in the quotes would be primary, and analysis provided by the author would be secondary.
 * Newspaper reports contemporary to WWI are in a gray area, due to both their age and the possibility that the reports were altered for propaganda purposes (which was a common feature of WWI-era press). Because the Battle of Verdun is hardly an obscure topic for academic study, as editors we have the luxury of being able to access a very wide range of academic sources, so we would have little-to-no reason to use a questionable source.
 * So, any questions? Want to try some practice problems? signed,Rosguill talk 19:50, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind some practice, because I thought I was doing almost all Secondary. However, if I do add a primary, I add secondary sources to back it up, though that seems to not be something which Buckshot and Dormskirk are fans of for some reason. J-Man11 (talk) 20:42, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I've set up a practice page at User:Rosguill/J-Man11 primary sources practice and have added a first set of questions. Feel free to work on it at whatever pace you wish. signed,Rosguill talk 22:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Newspaper reports contemporary to WWI are in a gray area, due to both their age and the possibility that the reports were altered for propaganda purposes (which was a common feature of WWI-era press). Because the Battle of Verdun is hardly an obscure topic for academic study, as editors we have the luxury of being able to access a very wide range of academic sources, so we would have little-to-no reason to use a questionable source.
 * So, any questions? Want to try some practice problems? signed,Rosguill talk 19:50, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind some practice, because I thought I was doing almost all Secondary. However, if I do add a primary, I add secondary sources to back it up, though that seems to not be something which Buckshot and Dormskirk are fans of for some reason. J-Man11 (talk) 20:42, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I've set up a practice page at User:Rosguill/J-Man11 primary sources practice and have added a first set of questions. Feel free to work on it at whatever pace you wish. signed,Rosguill talk 22:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I've set up a practice page at User:Rosguill/J-Man11 primary sources practice and have added a first set of questions. Feel free to work on it at whatever pace you wish. signed,Rosguill talk 22:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Garrett Reynolds (BMX riders)
Hello, could you help me to maintain this article by giving it a linguistic review--OaxacaGenius (talk) 17:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , the prose looks ok to me as far as grammar and neutrality are concerned. signed,Rosguill talk 19:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination 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 :

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

The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

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

There is currently a backlog of over articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Thoughts?
Although seemingly quixotic and a bit of a stretch, what are your thoughts on editors seeking NPR be made to pass through NPP academy before granting NPR rights? Celestina007 (talk) 19:23, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I think it would be excessive, as many editors are able to learn how to do new page reviews without formal instruction. I think that the current system of trial runs with supervision is sufficient. signed,Rosguill talk 19:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * That is infact true, not to talk of the amount of pressure it would put on brilliant tutors like yourself. You are correct when you say overtime editors learn how to do new page reviewing but what I have discovered is self taught editors who think they know, in actuality do not know and are oblivious of the fact that they do not know. In-fact that was me in 2019, I had expressly told my tutor that I already knew 90% of new page reviewing, during the course of my NPP I had an epiphany that I barely knew 50% about new page reviewing. The Essence of NPP academy can never be emphasized enough. I however agree with you that the trial runs are sufficient. Celestina007 (talk) 19:46, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * , It looks like an IP editor converted the page to a redirect with an edit summary pointing to an irrelevant essay. I restored the article. signed,Rosguill talk 07:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Retrospective
Hello Rosguill,

Prior to your ANI close, I made this entry so that the article could be created by a neutral. I however noted that removed the entry with the summary; Editor who put that there is tbanned from anything related to that article. Attempt to put back there any you’d be in violation of your tban. I want to confirm if the TBAN can be applied retrospectively or this is a gravedancy attempt at baiting me. Kind regards,  Princess of Ara <small style="color:pink">(talk)  06:16, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , Celestina007 was allowed, if not required, to remove that entry. I don't consider that to be a retroactive application of the topic ban, but the topic ban does prevent you from contesting the edit further. signed,Rosguill talk 06:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess. Thank you for the clarification!  Princess of Ara <small style="color:pink">(talk)  06:27, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Why did you close my discussion ?
Why are all my discussions being closed at the AN and tea house. Why are you all trying to hide it under the carpet what an editor did? Positiveilluminati (talk) 19:27, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I closed the teahouse discussion per WP:FORUMSHOP, as we want to avoid having two parallel discussions about the same topic at once. I had nothing to do with the decision to close the AN discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 19:35, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Adopt to other languages
Dear Rosguill,

Long time no talk, I hope your are fine. I would have a(nother) question:

I added this paragraph (I saw this interesting guy/character in Narcos 3): Rosso José Serrano / Public image and recognition

And I would like to add this in the Spanish article as well by using Google Translate and DeepL for the text, keeping the English references and add 1-2 Spanish references. Would that be OK?

Thank you and have a great Sunday! --F.Blaubiget (talk) 04:29, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

PS: I added his appearance in Narcos already: ES
 * , the use of machine translation is discouraged unless you have high proficiency in the output language (WP:MACHINETRANSLATION). signed,Rosguill talk 06:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you Rosguill, didn´t know that. Best wishes! --F.Blaubiget (talk) 05:16, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Help! Accidentally accepted an existing article in the main space(duplicate article)
Dear Rosguill,

I accidentally accepted a duplicate article named Smartless (Podcast), the existing article is under the name SmartLess. I did an AfD on the accepted article, is there a way to move the page back to the draft space and decline? This is my first blunder using AfC, I will be careful with this next time, I will pause that and continue my NPP, and then resume AfC again. Sorry for the trouble.

<b style="color:#000">Quantum</b><sup style="color:#300">Realm  (<b style="color:#609">meow</b> • <b style="color:#F63">pawtrack</b>) 06:03, 14 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Rosguill, the problem is resolved! ^_^ <b style="color:#000">Quantum</b><sup style="color:#300">Realm  (<b style="color:#609">meow</b> • <b style="color:#F63">pawtrack</b>) 12:23, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Haytor Granite Tramway
Hi, I noticed that you've just marked the Haytor Granite Tramway as reviewed. I'm a bit puzzled, I thought reviewing was for new articles, and this one has been in existence since 7 January 2007‎. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:00, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I believe what happened is that I reviewed the redirect created at Heytor Granite Tramway, which was created recently; when you clicked the notification, it probably took you straight past the redirect and to the article. signed,Rosguill talk 21:06, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for getting back to me.  I should have spotted that, I created the redirect!  Actually, I didn't realise that redirects were subject to review.  Best Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Pan Am Flight 799 article again
A couple of years ago, you kindly reviewed Pan Am Flight 799 and helped the process of improving it to your satisfaction, and I am lastingly grateful for the expert review. The article continues to show the notice "This article is a rough translation from Russian" asking for help improving the translation. That was definitely true in November 2018, when someone apparently created the page by machine-translating from ru.wikipedia.org, but, in the opinion of this native English speaker, it seems to me it's been extensively copyedited, and for the last couple of years has been idiomatic and smoothly readable. If you are free, would you mind lending your expert scrutiny again, on that question? Thank you.
 * Hey IP, I agree that the tag isn't necessary anymore and have gone ahead and removed it. signed,Rosguill talk 06:17, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

You been trouted again
How many pages do you review!? You must be getting tired of reviewing all of those pages, do you? Sorry if this offends you. Angelgreat (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I mostly review redirects these days, so it's just become a routine to spend a half hour or so going through a day's worth of backlog each day. signed,Rosguill talk 21:12, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

The Who Tour 1982
Hi, I was searching for an article on this tour and was surprised to see it redirected a couple of months ago. Was there any discussion of this anywhere other than through edit summaries? This was billed as their "Farewell Tour" and received a lot of press coverage, and was a financial success. If I can find the sources to meet WP:NTOUR (I'm sure they are out there) would there be any objection to turning it back into an article? Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:12, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , if you can find solid sources you'll see no objection from me. signed,Rosguill talk 22:19, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

collective consensus - Hellenism
Hello, how is it possible to reach a "collective consensus" with colonizers trying to control the narrative on a topic? Stop redirecting everything topic to Hellenism. KLEOPATROS7 (talk) 21:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , well, we're certainly not going to get anywhere without a consensus. You can read up on how we make decisions on Wikipedia at WP:CONSENSUS. But repeatedly creating content forks and ignoring other editors' concerns is likely going to end with you losing your editing permissions. Please engage constructively with other editors and try to work towards a solution. signed,Rosguill talk 22:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I will try my best here. KLEOPATROS7 (talk) 22:58, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

NPP school
Hi Rosguill. I was interested in joining the NPP school and I was wondering if you would be willing to take me on as a student. I have been a Wikipedian since 2018 and I've written a few articles, but the NPP process looks pretty complicated and nuanced, so I think that the NPP school would be a useful learning experience. I've graudated CVUA, so I know about a bit about the speedy deletion criteria (although I don't know how important that would be in new page reviewing - maybe G11s?) I'm in UTC-5 so I don't think timezone should be too much of an issue. Clover moss (talk) 23:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'd normally be happy to help, but this isn't a great time for me, and I don't expect to be more free for the next few months. signed,Rosguill talk 23:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright. I'll look for another trainer, then. Clover moss  (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_15#South_American_Schools_Games
Help me create the article instead of deleting the pages. They all exist and the matches are not unreal.

hi, about this :

http://fisuamerica.com/en/tag/pan-american-university-games/

http://fisuamerica.com/en/tag/fisu-america-games/
 * When the goal is to encourage article creation, the best idea is to not create a redirect, per Redirect #10. Please don't remove RfD tags while discussion is ongoing. signed,Rosguill talk 21:02, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Talk about redirecting. When I am creating an article, then the discussion about deleting it is irrelevant because it is no longer a diversion but an article. At the end of each article whose article was not created, you can delete the tag. In addition, all of them can be redirected to sports in the Americas and there are no problems.
 * I would suggest that you leave these comments at the deletion discussion so that other editors can see them and the articles don't get deleted by accident. signed,Rosguill talk 21:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Pan American University Games for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pan American University Games is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Pan American University Games until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Pan American University Games
This user seems to be looking for nonsense excuses to delete the article. It had already bothered me in related articles. You are also discouraging me from working because I seem to be wasting my time. The article is well known and there are many corresponding articles. Asia will also start regional student competitions from 2022. Despite being new, there are enough resources and based on the principle of the snowball, there is no need to continue the discussion because the result is clear. --Hao Xia Xia (talk) 04:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)


 * South American University Games
 * European Universities Games
 * ASEAN University Games
 * All-Africa University Games
 * I'm not really interested in getting involved in the discussion, but based on what I've seen so far the sources provided are sorely lacking. The other articles you've linked here appear to be cited to more of the same. I wouldn't be surprised if you can find better coverage in other languages, but what I've been able to find in English isn't enough to justify an article. signed,Rosguill talk 04:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

This user's argument from the beginning was that these competitions are irrelevant to Panam Sport:

http://www.badmintonpanam.org/badminton-will-be-part-of-fisu-america-games-2020/

You can see that it is also reflected in official sites such as the official badminton site of the Americas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hao Xia Xia (talk • contribs)
 * I'm sorry, but these sources appear to be press releases that are affiliated with the organizations in question, and thus do not count towards notability. What we're looking for is either in-depth newspaper/magazine coverage (e.g. ), or ideally coverage in peer-reviewed academic journals discussing the history and importance of these events. signed,Rosguill talk 05:00, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Keep in mind that these competitions are newly established. The second period has been postponed due to Corona. Both hosts were in South America, so 90% of the sources will be in Portuguese or Spanish. It may not be very realistic to want to have multiple sources in the Academy journals during the same period. Sports competitions are not usually covered in journal articles. Except for the Olympics. In your opinion, should all other articles for student competitions be removed? I do not think there is such a strictness for articles on Wikipedia. The only reason for this behavior is the user's (Sportsfan 1234) insistence on confronting me. And that really bothers me. Hao Xia Xia (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SELL_Student_Games

Baltic student competitions (only 5 countries) also have articles. Is this article famous? Probably not. If we want to be so strict, it seems we have to delete more than a few million articles.Hao Xia Xia (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

request
Hi again, I correct the redirects. Please close the discussion. I also expressed my views on the article(Pan American University Games). I suggest clicking the resource improvement tag instead of deleting it. If the decision is deleted, please do not delete it and move to the following path:

from Pan American University Games to:

Sport in South America or World University Games. thank you.Hao Xia Xia (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

i can create 4 article but I think it will take a long time again to discuss credible sources as well as fame. Currently I have other priorities for working on Wikipedia. thanks again.Hao Xia Xia (talk) 07:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The RfD will continue until it is closed by an uninvolved editor. Regarding your arguments in the section above, if sources are truly nonexistent then those articles should be taken down as well. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:TOOSOON, as you are not the first person to raise these arguments. signed,Rosguill talk 16:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

source
I am find source for all of them:

Hao Xia Xia (talk) 07:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

https://www.cubapostal.com/cgi-local/home.cgi?mode=view_detail&id=965 : Latin American University Games

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0041134516309393  : Latin American Transplant Games (Academic Journal)


 * I'm sorry, these sources don't look like the right kind to me. The academic sources do not appear to provide any significant coverage of the games, they just happen to use participants in the games as a sample population. The news sources, meanwhile, do not appear reliable. signed,Rosguill talk 15:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

come recuperare la pagina di Wikipedia cancellata
ciao rosguill, voglio sapere che come recuperare la pagina di wikipedia cancellata? il nome della pagina è "sangramsingh thakur" grazie. --ForArtist (talk) 10:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , questo articolo è stato cancellata sopra AfD; è necessario provedere citazioni migliori che loro chi anno stato nella ultima versione, che soddisfarono con WP:GNG. signed,Rosguill talk 15:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

se stai stabilendo la pagina, ti fornirò fonti affidabili o mi farò sapere come fornirti.--ForArtist (talk) 18:11, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

NPP right
Hi Rosguill, you gave me the NPP flag a month ago on a temporary basis, although I wasn't as active as I'd have liked (having been on holiday for two weeks!) hopefully I've demonstrated sufficient competence in NPP and you'd be happy to make the right permanent? Thanks in advance! ninety:one 10:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , your track record looks good, ✅ signed,Rosguill talk 16:27, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ninety:one 10:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Another try
Rosguill, do you think you could give me another shot at this...? I was under a lot of medical treatment for the past few months, and Wikipedia had to take a back seat, unfortunately. My right hand was literally non-functional for an extended period of time. - AppleBsTime (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , I just extended it for another month. signed,Rosguill talk 20:20, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! It feels so good to be able to type again, even if a little stiff! - AppleBsTime (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and &#32; Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on "All RFCs" request for comments. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:30, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Question about your closure at RfD
Hey, could you explain how you got a "no consensus" vote at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 20 with 6 in favor of deleting them all and only 2 opposing. Gonnym (talk) 07:10, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I essentially considered it a minor trainwreck scenario, with late proposals to not delete 5-7 gaining traction. Rather than hold the first 5 redirects hostage and relist a large and intimidating discussion, I thought it would be better to close it and leave it open for editors to renominate the remaining redirects if they so chose. signed,Rosguill talk 08:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

RfD nominations bug
Hi Rosguill. I've noticed lately that there seems to be a bug which causes new RfD nominations to appear with incorrect formatting (more specifically on the "stats" link). I've been fixing this manually, but I still can't put my finger on what is causing this error. I'd appreciate your help with solving this. Thanks. <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:aqua 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 02:20, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , that's odd, I'm afraid I don't have much intuition as to where things may have gone wrong. Have you seen this bug occur with a Twinkle-generated discussion? signed,Rosguill talk 04:53, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, but since it has happened quite often, as you can see on yesterday's log page, then I guess it might be due to some issues with Twinkle. <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:aqua 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 06:26, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * This seems to be due to a change to Module:PageLinks. I've placed an edit request at Template talk:Page-multi. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:25, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Let's hope it gets fixed soon. <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:aqua 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 09:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Wolf Burchard
I have turned "Wolf Burchard" into a full article. Included draft from Mississippi.SDoderer (talk) 12:26, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , great, I left a note calling for the RfD discussion to be closed accordingly. signed,Rosguill talk 12:41, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank youSDoderer (talk) 12:44, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

NPR extension
Hi Rosguill, you granted me temporary NPR rights a month ago, and they will expire tonight. I have added a request to have them extended at WP:PERM/NPR, in case you have the time to take a look. Thank you. JBchrch  talk  09:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Telecommunication Instructional Modeling System for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Telecommunication Instructional Modeling System is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Telecommunication Instructional Modeling System until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Note: I am notifying you, because you reviewed and approved the page. Alice Jason (talk) 22:15, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I don't believe I at any point reviewed the article, although it looks like I did review some redirects pointing to the page. signed,Rosguill talk 05:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry it was not you that reviewed the main page, but I think you reviewed the directory page TIMS.Alice Jason (talk) 09:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

From Aberdeen Savings Bank - "britishlistedbuildings.co.uk" is a User-generated content website.
Howay man Rosguill. Gaan canny Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 13:06, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up; the site itself is pretty open about being a one man show, but the way it's been cited sure makes it look official in our article. And as far as Geordie goes, I'm afraid all I've got is Mawk Nopflaw signed,Rosguill talk 13:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

"Waterflame" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Waterflame. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 15 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~ El D. (talk to me) 19:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Sub-category "Category:Palestine ethnographers"
Hi, Rosguill. I wanted to ask you if there was a special way to designate a category (such as "Category:Palestine ethnographers") as a sub-category of the parent category, "Category:Palestinologists"? If so, can you do this for us?Davidbena (talk) 15:48, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , unfortunately categories are very much a blind spot for me on Wikipedia, so you're going to get a better answer from someone else. I'm guessing this should be possible though. signed,Rosguill talk 16:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Mentoring
Hello, I'm hoping to publish an article and am interested in being taken on as a mentee or adoptee. Are you adopting this year? Thanks! Nellas Galadhon (talk) 21:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'm currently in a rather busy time and can't commit to take on any additional students at this time, although I may be able to starting in September or October. signed,Rosguill talk 22:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks

Are you the only one reviewing new redirects?
Hi @Rosguill, and thanks for promptly reviewing new redirects when I create them. So far, I find that you are the only person that has reviewed the redirects that I create. Are you the only person who does this for the entire Wikipedia? Thanks! Félix An (talk) 02:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I make a point of clearing out a day's worth of redirect backlog every day, mostly because due to technical limitations the queue cutoff for redirects is much shorter than for articles. I imagine that some redirects get checked by editors who like to patrol from the front of the queue, but I'm not aware of any other editors working on the back end with me. signed,Rosguill talk 02:26, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

AmirahBreen
Please revoke 's temporary new page reviewer permissions. Their sole experience at AfD consists of !voting to keep their own article creations, and they have displayed some fundamental misunderstandings of Wikipedia policy and the English language. Their article Ahanchian v Xenox Pictures Inc., et al is so bad that I suspect there are some reading comprehension issues at play—see the AfD for more details. Another of their recent creations, Shopaccino, is so blatantly non-notable that I would not be surprised if they are a paid editor. A perusal of their talk page history reveals multiple complaints from established editors, including a situation at London Chartered Bank of Australia where they edit warred about the inclusion of a lead too long tag on a five-paragraph article with no section headings (and hence no lead). This pattern of behavior is not acceptable, even for someone with just temporary NPR permissions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you for bringing this to my attention, I have pulled their NPR permission and will be reviewing their patrol log to re-enqueue potentially problematic content. signed,Rosguill talk 17:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick response. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 17:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Shusha&#32; on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 18:30, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Hawd al-Kawthar
Hi Rosguill. Thanks for reviewing all those redirects. There's one where I made a mistake: the Pond of Abundance is called Hawd al-Kawthar in Arabic, with diacritics Ḥawḍ al-Kawthar. I didn't notice the second diacritic (under the d) at first and have created a redirect for Hawḍ .... Could you please remove this redirect, as it is a) faulty, and b) the one without diacritics is perfectly sufficient? Sorry and thanks, Arminden (talk) 14:50, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , so to make sure I'm understanding this, Ḥawḍ al-Kawthar is correct and you want me to delete Hawḍ al-Kawthar? FWIW, a faster route to get this done would be to just tag the appropriate page with db-g7 signed,Rosguill talk 17:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi. Not exactly. The diacritics are generally not used by the wider public, so Ḥawḍ al-Kawthar is correct, but not needed, and Hawḍ... (the existing redirect) is both incorrect and not needed. So Hawḍ al-Kawthar needs to be removed. It's not disturbing, but it's useless ballast. I thought you might be able to remove it w/o delay, a db-g7 application needs yet another admin to take action, or am I misunderstanding something? Sorry again for the trouble. Arminden (talk) 22:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , ✅. As far as G7, it's probably a faster way in general, since a bunch of admins patrol the CSD backlog whereas by asking me specifically you're going to end up waiting until I can get around to it (and in this case it would have also saved you the effort of having to explain which specific page you wanted gone). signed,Rosguill talk 23:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Jake Wartenberg
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Emperor • Viridian Bovary
 * Pictogram voting rename.png →

Guideline and policy news
 * Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
 * A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
 * A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
 * A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news
 * The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration
 * A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous
 * The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)