User talk:SmokeyJoe

Wikipedia:Numbers
Sorry for the late reply. Feel free to reuse that title for Notability (numbers), or a redirect to it. Cheers. —Michael Z. 2007-10-08 20:49 Z 

Re:Adrian Garcia
Hi Joe! I just answered your question on the article's talk page!

Thanks and God bless! Antonio Me! Martin (Whats going on?) 20:55, 24 July, 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 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.

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

 * You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
 * Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
 * Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
 * Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
 * Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
 * Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
 * Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
 * Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

hi
Hi @SmokeyJoe Can you help me to create notable topic about Translator and journalist hi, you can see the news on google in Arabic and Turkish and English Thanks for your time. Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, but first, show me three existing articles that you have improved. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * thank you @SmokeyJoe for your feedback, for articles i don't have yet as you asked me can you start the draft of the article and i will give you all details that i have ,i don't have yet as you asked me, but i think you will like my work Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Have you seen multiple news sources in several languages ​​and extensive coverage on the topic? Alexlovesjournalism (talk) 08:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Do not try to create a new article until you have some experience improving existing content. If you do, you’ll waste your time, and others’ time.  Making an acceptable new article is hard to do, with no experience.
 * To get you started, what are three articles that your new topic might be worth a mention in? Add the mention there, in the context of the existing article.  If you can’t do this, then probably your topic is not notable and will never be accepted. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Prolific sock User:علي_أبو_عمر blocked again. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review/Log/2024 May 20
I don't want to distract from the closure review, hence why I'm posting this here, but you've retained "he" in your comment whilst correcting "him", and you may want to fix that. — Qwerfjkl  talk  13:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

"Sangerpedia" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sangerpedia&redirect=no Sangerpedia] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. (Notification being sent to all who participated in the DRV.) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Did you mean to just copy my comment?
At Special:Diff/1228665092 you've just copied my comment verbatim and added nothing else? Is that what you intended to do? Thryduulf (talk) 14:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * User:Thryduulf, I don’t think you are looking carefully. SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Subtle, but a fair point. Thryduulf (talk) 15:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh
AfD should not be used as an alternative to Requested merges but with imaginary fairies who will complete the merge. I love it, although I know your !vote is a serious one. I'd settle for fairies that make the easy merge script work! Star  Mississippi  18:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Children linking to YouTube
To answer your question here as it's far afield of the template, I have removed, deleted (if it meets G11 or U5 criteria), and suppressed links to children's YouTube videos and, as an example you didn't list but happens approximately as frequently, Roblox creations depending on context. For children as young as what would be happening with Gen Alpha, even a small amount of personal information on such linked pages would cause me to suppress and a quick look at OS tickets mentioning YouTube suggests that other oversighters would also suppress in similar situations. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Good point at MfD
You make a good point, and I have replied there. You also write: "Although there’s a lot there, it’s within reasonable leeway for 33,000 mainspace contributions over 21 years." I'm not sure what you mean. I assume by "a lot there", you're referring to total bytes, but maybe you mean "a lot to think about"? Also, what's the "33,000 mainspace contributions over 21 years" mean? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:27, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * User:Valjean. They’re a lot there, in your user subpage.  A lot of bytes and a lot of edits, and a lot of material that one could read through carefully, which I have not.
 * There is less in there than the value of your 33,000 mainspace contributions over 21 years. This is the first test for a case of possible abuse of Wikipedia as a free web host.  Are you primarily a Wikipedian?  The answer is clearly yes.
 * The valid challenges include that the page is written up like an opinion piece, sourced yes, but still it’s a lot of your opinion. That may be OK, but Wikipedia POV on a sort of sensitive topic like Trump is something Wikipedia should avoid, and that includes screeds in userspace.  Whether you page is a humble Wikipedians POV or a screed is a question of whether it’s ok or not, in my opinion and experience.  Another point is the misleading title.  Why?  Archives are meant to be archives, not altered from being a true archive, and your frequent editing of it draws attention.  I think you’d be better with an accurate title.  You might argue that the title and content is your prerogative, but that is a losing pathway.
 * - SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)