User talk:Sulfurboy/Archive 11

Areté's page
Hey there- thanks so much for your input; I made some changes as per your suggestions. The thing is, if you look at pages for other independent schools like Areté, they have a very similar tone. If you take a look at pages like, say, Harvard-Westlake or Crossroads School, and still think our page sounds more "advertise-y" than theirs, please feel free to give us more feedback as to how to alter our page. One of the reasons we are trying to get our page up ASAP is that Google is mixing up info about our school with one in Arizona with a nearly identical name. We are trying to increase our web presence and proliferate information about Areté so that our two schools can each receive the attention they deserve. Thanks again for your help! Aretepreparatoryacademy (talk) 19:22, 2 December 2017 (UTC)Wendy
 * Please read WP:NOTADVERTISING. You are specifically trying to use Wikipedia to influence search results for your business. We, on the other hand, are writing an encyclopedia. Your goals seem contrary to ours. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 21:43, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

18:05:56, 4 December 2017 review of submission by Fritzgoebel
Dear Sulfurboy,

Thank you for taking the time to do a speedy review of my article, entitled 'Named Passenger Trains of the United States'. (I have no idea why the name of the article shows up near the bottom of my page.) Also in my sandbox page a quote has been deleted after the first paragraph as follows:

The use of names to distinguish certain major passenger trains had a long history on the Pennsylvania Railroad system. However, for the first fifty years or so the names were simply descriptive, usually the destination paired with the term "Express", which set such trains apart from "Accommodations" or locals. A more select category, the "Limited" with all first-class accommodations (parlor or sleeping cars), made its debut with the New York and Chicago Limited of 1881. The "Special", just as exclusive as the Limited, but making fewer stops or running extra-fast, appeared in 1902. However, it was not until the railroad began to encounter competition for passenger traffic around the time of World War I that the Passenger Department began giving its deluxe trains more colorful or evocative names.[1]

In any event, my idea was that this would be a 'transitional' page between the page 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_named_passenger_trains', which would link to it, and the links on my proposed page such as 'List of named passenger trains of the United States (A–B)', etc. Please have a look at ''https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_named_passenger_trains'. A link to my proposed page would replace the 6 links there underneath 'List of named passenger trains of Mexico'. In short, the proposed page provides background for the Wikipedia user to help them understand that there can never be a 'definitive' list of named American trains, given that there is often uncertainly about whether a train designation is really a name or just a description. So, an interested user might proceed as follows:

1. Go to the existing page 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_named_passenger_trains', altered so that the links to the lists would be deleted and replaced by the link to my proposed page. 2. Then go to my proposed page, which would fill them in on why it is so difficult to specify precisely the names and dates of all the named American passenger trains. 3. Then go to whichever of the alphabetized pages is of interest.

Is that clear? I am happy to make any formatting or stylistic changes that you feel are appropriate. But if you feel that my proposed page should not exist at all, I would be very grateful if you could give me guidance on where the information contained in it should go.

Thanks!

Fritz Fritzgoebel (talk) 18:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Please Take a look
I have made the changes. Please take a look and further guide me. Thank you WikiChic (talk) 02:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Jungle Creations
Thanks for reviewing this article. I am wondering if you can have another look and let me know what I am missing. You say that the only source that covers the company is the Intendent article. There are many more, but not all of the available references are used in the article (there would be hundreds if I did). Here some others that are more focused on the company.


 * Startups (this is about one of its channels but talks about Jungle Creations, its founder, and other channels it owns).


 * RealBusiness (this focuses on the company and is a publication used quite a bit in Wikipedia).


 * BBC (the headline makes this look like it’s all about one of the company’s channels, but it discusses Jungle Creations in great detail in the article, including its other channels, expansion, revenue, funding, and viewership).


 * Post-Truth: How Bullshit Conquered the World (a book that discusses the company’s cyclist video that went viral).


 * Journal eConomico (this is a featured story in Portugese).


 * Money Week (talks about the founding of the company and how it grew into Jungle Creations).

You are correct in that they are mentioned along with other properties they own. The founder as well as its channel Viral Thread are likely notable along with Jungle Creations as their own pages, but thought it would be best to put everything into a single page. It would seem very promotional to try to create multiple pages when in reality they could be briefly discussed in this page since they are all the same topic.--Paulbolo (talk) 05:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles for creation: Akesse Moise Sanza (November 15)
I have added more citations and references to the article Draft:Akesse Moise Sanza Ella4sam (talk) 22:42, 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.

Help with draft?
Hi : :) I saw you on the AFC participants page and I am hoping you can help me.  I created a draft for a new article nearly a month ago and the backlog is so severe it seems like it could still be a very long time before it is even reviewed.  So I was wondering if there is any chance you can take a look at it and approve it if you think it's up to par?  I've done my best to write it in a neutral tone and used many reliable sources.  Other Wikipedians have also contributed to help better the article.  I am a fan of the artist's music and I checked all the Wikipedia guidelines for notability and he clearly meets the criteria for notable musicians.  Here is a link to the draft I wrote.  Thank you very much in advance for any help you might be able to provide. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ian_Erix Best, Stefan Bruinsects (talk) 07:31, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

19:06:40, 21 December 2017 review of submission by Compcon
Greetings,

Thank you for taking the time to review the article submission. We would like to further adjust the article to satisfy the guidelines of Wikipedia and seek your counsel on the specific adjustments that would do so.

It should be noted that this article was drafted by a committee involved in the field, not a single person. Since your review, we have asked impartial readers to assess the draft (after making some edits) and they felt it read like any other wikipedia entry.

That being said, we are open to your specific suggestions so the publication of the entry can be expedited.

Many thanks for your assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Compcon (talk • contribs) 19:06, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Compcon - Who are you? Are you a human, or a group of humans?  Do you represent a group or organization that is promoting a concept?  If so, please be aware that in Wikipedia, one account should belong to one person.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:10, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Viacheslav Borshchev
Hello Sulfurboy. I am trying to create an article about a sportsmen who already has wikipedia page but it is in Russian. While writing my draft I was following the same pattern and still my draft got denied. There was comment about my draft "at least specify which sources support the statement that he's a world champion, and which support the statement about his pro career". Even original article doesn't specify the source that supports the statement about this sportsmen. Please let me know what shall be done in order to make this draft working. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikolaykz (talk • contribs) 03:54, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 13:41:41, 30 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Squint0r
You say my article on the new Mad at the World album Hope "fails general notability guidelines for it to have it's own page", but there are so many examples of albums that barely have any information on them (less than mine) and are live on Wikipedia. Here's just the first one I looked at:

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

The Mad at the World album is a brand new album, so the reviews haven't come out yet, but that doesn't mean it's not a significant work that doesn't deserve it's own page to complete the band's catalog on Wikipedia.

Can I remove something to make the page more acceptable? Or are you wanting me to add more "notable information"? I linked off to JesusFreakHideout.com, who wrote about the album saying it was the band's first album in 22 years. That's not notable? Not sure what else you want me to do. Please be specific.

Squint0r (talk) 13:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

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)

Draft:Kedar Kashyap
Hi you've rejected Draft:Kedar Kashyap because the sources don't show the subject's notability. But he's verifiably a minister in a state government and so automatically meets WP:NPOL. Is there any consideration to the contrary that I've missed? Thanks. – Uanfala (talk) 23:17, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

09:37:51, 9 January 2018 review of submission by PATRIZIA KinderHaus-Stiftung
Dear Sulfurboy,

42 days ago I added all available sources to the draft which are available. There are also various independent and reliable sources. I did a lot of effort to create this article and I do not know what else to do.

The draft page sais: Declined by Sulfurboy 49 days ago.Last edited by PATRIZIA KinderHaus-Stiftung 42 days ago. This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. Could you please advice me how to proceed in order to make this article public?

Many thanks

Wolfgang — Preceding unsigned comment added by PATRIZIA KinderHaus-Stiftung (talk • contribs) 09:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Request for Re-Review of Updated/Resourced "Daniel S. Janik" Article
aloha, I have updated and re-sourced my suggested Wikipedia page, "Daniel S. Janik" and would appreciate it if you could re-review it and provide any further suggestions. ```` Daniel S. Janik — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielSJanik (talk • contribs) 21:44, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

07:10, 11 November 2017 (UTC) DRAFT: Kusala Bhikshu
Thank you for your comments on this new article I had submitted for review in November. Draft:Kusala_Bhikshu

I have updated the footnotes to reflect your comments about sources.

I have also reviewed the guidelines for notability. Please advise if I should do anything further before re-submitting.

Thank you for your time and attention, Eluckring (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2018 (UTC)Eluckring — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eluckring (talk • contribs) 18:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

00:16:33, 26 January 2018 review of submission by Sarah Josephine
I would like to know what I need to do to get the page published? Bare minimum at this time? Would really help. Something specific? Sarah Josephine (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

SULFURBOY are you THERE? Sarah Josephine (talk) 21:34, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Most of the references in your draft are to articles about a predecessor band, . Those are worthless for establishing the notability of Godless Throne. Two of your references are to Wikipedia articles. Sorry, but Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source for Wikipedia. That is circular referencing. Include references that show, convincingly, that this band meets Notability (music). That is your #1 task, and everything else is completely secondary. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  06:40, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay so when I reference things like "keyboards" I can't highlight that and use Wikipedia for that? I have seen that done a lot. I can't reference Wiki at all? And yes okay, I understand on the latter part of your comment. Thanks for replying. Is there a time limit I have to update this or can this sit in queue forever until I can gather my citations? Sarah Josephine (talk) 17:06, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

I just answered my own question to you. "Keyboards" isn't a citation. So anything that's not a citation that's highlighted can be used as a "wiki" link, but if it's a citation then it can't be. Okay I understand. Thanks! Sarah Josephine (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Re Draft article on Natalie Duddington
Thank you for reviewing the article [] that I submitted about a year ago. You repeat the opinions of New York Actuary. You are

(1) not convinced of the subject's notability. Yet, leaving aside her collaboration with Constance Garnett, she translated some two dozen books from Russian into English, and not easy ones at that. Notable among them is her Oblomov, which is still praised today. Her articles in Philosophy are still cited a century later. It was she who campaigned for a translation of Dostoyevsky's works, and she explained the meaning of problem passages and helped Garnett find suitable expressions for them in English. (Remember, Garnett was as good as blind; so Natalie read aloud the texts for her to translate.) Dostoeyevsky's impact on English-speaking culture was considerable (I am being careful not to use a peacock term here). The Wiki entry for him says that his works influenced "Modern cultural movements such as the surrealists, the existentialists and the Beats." He also influenced a great many fiction writers. Without an English translation, no influence on our culture. If that does not make her notable, then I ... am speechless.

(2) You want me to cite more sources. Before writing the article, I searched the internet exhaustively -- your list adds nothing. I can assure you that, at the time of submission there was no further source to be cited, and I have not found one since. (I am a retired academic; I know how to do research. I even tracked down the English family that Natalie married into, and can tell you about the excellent reputation of her son as a Jungian.)

(3) You accuse me of using peacock terms. Let's see, where could I have I exaggerated: "a particularly intelligent child" -- this was Garnett's view, justified by Natalie's parents treating Natalie as an adult when she was only 12, and justifies/explains Garnett's decision to persuade Natalie to come to England. The success of her university studies and the excellence of her translations bear out this opinion. I'm afraid I cannot see, despite close reading, any peacock terms in my article that are not quotations from much greater authorities than myself.

In conclusion, there are Wiki pages on far more insignificant figures. Just look at the artist Jessie Holliday: we know of no more than half-a-dozen portraits by her (and some of those only by repute).

So I cannot accept your rejection of this article, and intend to take it for arbitration.gpeterw (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:11, 2 February 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.

16:12:08, 20 February 2018 review of submission by FourPW
Hi, I've been asked to help ensure this submission is neutral and abides by Wikipedia's guidelines. I have since edited the content to achieve this, but would appreciate some pointers/feedback, before re-submission. :) FourPW (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

07:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC) review of submission Hostinger International
Good morning. FYI: article has been updated with reliable sources. Can you please have a look? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilberto.weiss (talk • contribs) 07:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

09:00, 24 October 2017 (UTC) review of my submission by NGFrem
Hello! Thank you for reviewing my draft for "Neemat Frem" Draft:Neemat Frem. Kindly note that my name is Samer Chemaly, and I just created the account with the name NGFrem but the email associated with the account is mine samer.chemaly@mediapaklb.com, and this is not an autobiography. Appreciate providing me with more details about how to add the adequate refrences and appreciate giving me an example so I fix the article and submit it. Thank you in advance. Hopefully this time it will work. Thank you again, NGFrem (talk) 09:00, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

02:19:53, 30 October 2017 review of submission by Alpertuzcu
Hello,

I accidentally submitted my draft a few days ago while it was still in works. Since your decline, I have written the article now with resources, and could you please re-review it for me when you have a chance? If there's anything missing I'd be glad to fix it. Thank you

Alper — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpertuzcu (talk • contribs) 02:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

23:21:44, 13 November 2017 review of submission by Randomloves74
Not requesting a re-review, just wanted to ask if the problem with the article is that ALLBold text the quotation marks in the drafted article need to have footnotes before I can resubmit again. Just want to make sure that I have it right. Also are there other things I need to change in the article so that I will not have any not issues. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randomloves74 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

06:45:27, 21 November 2017 review of submission by AnRoCa
Dear Sulfurboy,

we adjusted our wording and added a few references. We're still trying to adapt to Wikipedia's guidelines and hope that our adjustments are going in the right direction. The new references are reliable and independent as requested and should display the notability of our organization. We also adjusted the wording and hope it fits Wikipedia's requirements. Please share your thoughts with us and let us know which further steps should be taken.

Thank you for your help.

Best regards, AnRoCa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnRoCa (talk • contribs) 06:45, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

14:10:22, 21 November 2017 review of submission by PATRIZIA KinderHaus-Stiftung
Dear Sulfurboy,

I have added additional independent and reliable sources. Meanwhile there are eight independent sources, from which two are official federal/state sources.

Unfortunately I have no idea what else to add. How many/what kind of sources are expected?

Any hints what to do if these are all available sources?

Thank you in advance

Best regards

Wolfgang — Preceding unsigned comment added by PATRIZIA KinderHaus-Stiftung (talk • contribs) 14:10, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

04:15:58, 27 November 2017 review of submission by DanielSJanik
Could you please tell me why the sourcing was inadequate and how I can provide that? Take any line and give me an example, if possible, so I can see exactly how to do this. Thank you!
 * The entire article is unsourced, not sure how to provide an example. I would review WP:REFB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulfurboy (talk • contribs) 06:04, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Simply Southern
We are working on adding additional information to substantiate the notability. We are also working on formatting the references correctly. Please allow us to do by not deleting the work/page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simplysouthern (talk • contribs) 21:18, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

01:16:52, 16 December 2017 review of submission by Johnbow2233
Hello, I corrected the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ursula_Hayden and it should be ready for another review. I noticed she is going to be guest starring on the television show The Bachelor in January which is another reason she should have a Wikipedia page. http://hollywoodlife.com/2017/12/05/the-bachelor-season-22-premiere-details-arie-luyendyk-jr/ Thank you, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbow2233 (talk • contribs) 01:16, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Styline Re-Edit
Hey Sulfurboy, I just edited an old page that was submitted by another user a few months ago - should be much better now, would be great if you can review it again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Styline

Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Electronicmusicguru (talk • contribs) 09:14, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

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.

Draft:Shift concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Shift, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:35, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Hope you can help
Hi Sulfurboy. I hope you can help me with me article. This is the first time i have ever published an article on Wikipedia and i am obviously not good at it. Anything you can do to help, i would be eternally grateful. Footballtrivia00352 (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

12:31:24, 26 April 2018 review of submission by Kefren gonzalez armayor
I have updated the links attempting to get wikipedia's requirements. Please let me know if there were other reasons for the decline. Kefren gonzalez armayor (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Charlie Hargrett
Hello,

This past September, I was working on a page for Charlie Hargrett (founder and lead guitarist of Blackfoot). After I published it, you moved it back to draft stage siting it needed to show more notoriety and references. The very next day, it looks like another publisher deleted the draft. To say I am disappointed is an understatement. I put quite a bit of work into that page and had planned on digging up more, quality details with the intent on eventually getting it approved.

Is it recoverable and why was it deleted? It was in its infantile stage.

Thank you,

Tom talleng2 Talleng2 (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Charlie Hargrett
My error. Sorry. I see that it was deleted due to 6 mos inactivity. I misread the date.

I have requested retrieval of the deleted page.

Thank you,

Talleng2 (talk) 04:27, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Shift


Hello, Sulfurboy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Shift".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 06:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:
 * WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags
 * Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:
 * A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons
 * There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy
 * Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English News Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.
 * Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
 * The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Manfred Carstens
Hi Sulfurboy -- I'm puzzled as to why you declined the above draft (I've just accepted it). The subject seems clearly notable and the sourcing adequate. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive! Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
 * Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: NPPbarnstar SE.png. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: RR3217-0014 100 rubles USSR 1989 Gold avers.png, Swiss-Commemorative-Coin-1991-CHF-250-reverse.png, Coin of Kazakhstan 500Thinker averse.png, US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.jpg.
 * Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Merger discussion for Sequential proportional approval voting
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Sequential proportional approval voting&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Dhalsim2 (talk) 23:57, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers. Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.
 * June backlog drive


 * New technology, new rules
 * New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
 * Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
 * Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.


 * Editathons
 * Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The Signpost
 * The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Your draft article, Draft:Cleyson LeRoy (C. L.) Brown


Hello, Sulfurboy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cleyson LeRoy (C. L.) Brown".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Sam Sailor 07:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.


 * Project news
 * The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.
 * As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.


 * There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See New pages patrol/Coordination for more info to see if you can help out.


 * Other
 * A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.


 * Moving to Draft and Page Mover
 * Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
 * If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
 * Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
 * The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
 * The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)