User talk:Triptothecottage/Archive 1

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Helpdesk
Thanks for helping out over at the helpdesk and good humor regarding "Terrible vocabulary and spellings". However, perhaps it might not have been the best idea to welcome them to edit the page. It was more than a little ironic that someone with such terrible spelling and grammar themselves, complain about spelling and grammar on another page. ;)

Happy holidays. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks mate! You're right, I should probably think a bit more about who I tell about the red button in future... still, no harm done by the look of it. Season's greetings to you too. Triptothecottage (talk) 02:43, 28 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Absoultely... To be honest, I was just looking for an excuse to somewhere state the irony of someone with terrible grammar complaining about grammar. I mean I'm no pro, so I'd be the last to make a big deal about it to someone else. LOL.... I was thinking about replying on the Helpdesk thread, but thought it would be inappropriate and unprofessional. ;) Tiggerjay (talk) 03:21, 28 December 2016 (UTC)r

Message
Hi Triptothecottage, How are you?, I ask you please check the editions of users that put European fantasies in their countries, in Argentines of European descent, many users insert supposed migrations and false data, when the best studies indicate that the Argentines are mestizos, thanks and greetings from Mexico.--Bleckter23 (talk) 01:03, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Greetings
Hello. Sorry for the situation with. He is a sockpuppet with a large history vandalizing pages and insulting users. He took advantage of my inactivity to pretend to be me. Greetings. --Bleckter (talk) 08:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Of all the things I thought were suspicious about Bleckter23 – that wasn't one of them! How bizarre. My apologies for all the alerts you got from me and others!

Message
Hi Triptothecottage, you reverted my changes to the Fairphone page. But the changes made were an improvement imho. They claims under criticism section are not at all supported by the citations. To me it seems the criticism part was until my changes written by a disgruntled person who used Wikipedia to paint an unfair picture of the project. Please look at the links in the article and judge for yourself. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daividda (talk • contribs) 09:22, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was probably a little hasty in reverting that. Thank you for your efforts. It would be great if you could put the NPOV tag back at the top of the page, though, because that will encourage other editors to help fix the issues. Triptothecottage (talk) 11:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Widr (talk) 09:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Proto-Punk Floyd
Hi Triptothecottage, thanks a lot for your action on that IP talk! I started an AN/E but don't have enough time, also perhaps at another noticeboard, what do you think? --.js 01:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: An Coimisiún Le Rincí Gaelacha has been accepted
 An Coimisiún Le Rincí Gaelacha, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Message
Hello Triptothecottage,

My name is Kelsey Butts and I am the publicist for Nikki DuBose. I noticed that you deleted all of the info that I put on her wikipedia page. Can you please revert that? Thanks so much - I am not sure how to go about doing it any other way as it keeps getting deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownbin87 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia has very strict rules about people such as yourself who are being paid to edit Wikipedia. Some of these may be found at WP:PAY. Much of the content you added was removed because it was not verifiable – in other words, you did not provide reliable sources for the information. The tone of the additions was also typical of what is called a puff piece; that is, an article intended to promote someone or something. Furthermore, it is a very serious breach of Wikipedia rules to use a second account to try and escape the scrutiny of a first account, as I have reason to believe you have with . (If these allegations are false, please respond to the investigation here.)


 * So, what can you do? I suggest that you compile a list of sources, which may be books, online articles, or any other reliable reference about the subject, and post them, along with the changes you would like made, at the talk page of the article in a new section. Myself and other editors will see if we can include any of the information in accordance with the rules.


 * Thank you. Triptothecottage (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Message
Hello Triptothecottage, I edited the bhapa page which you requested an explanation for the changes. I wanted to update that the Bhapa community is a well respected community of businessmen in the Sikh community. The article 'Bhapa' says the term is used in a 'pejorative' or negative sense. This is the view that racist few Sikhs hold - they say Bhapa in a negative way, whereas us majority of Sikhs see it not as pejorative but as a respectful title like businessman-sir, so please delete the word pejorative and write sir if you could. Second, it says "Jats mostly make fun of Bhapas dressing style like wearing a cloth on beard and using beard sprays'.. what in the world? I am a Jatt Sikh of the Randhawa clan, which is the highest and oldest, and most respected of all Jatt clans. We do not make fun of Bhapas dressing styles or any beard spray or make fun of their language for we speak the same language Punjabi. This is utter racism against our brothers from some racist writer :'( I am terrified to think a Bhapa child would check what their ethnic-subgroup name means, and they see their Jat brothers and kinsmen... it says we make fun of them? No! It is untrue. Finally, it also says 'the term has been used as a royal title in some regions of India, and the best known king was Bappa Rawal, founder of the Guhilot dynasty. This title is 'Buppa' and is a hindu dynasty, it has nothing to do with the Sikh group Bhapas. It is not the same lineage or pronounciation as Bhapa is Bhaapa, and Bappa is Bup-pah is completely different. Please remove that if you can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.199.60 (talk) 09:02, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Quite frankly, I have no knowledge of Sikh pejoratives, or Sikh titles. I reverted your edits because they were unsourced. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Thank you. Triptothecottage (talk) 11:05, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Volta (Cirque du Soleil)
… is now listed at WP:CP for copyright evaluation. Please, please, check for copyvio before moving pages to mainspace. You clearly saw something wrong, because you placed a "tone" tag – that was your cue to see if the unencyclopaedic text came from elsewhere (which of course it did). If in any doubt, please leave the draft for someone else to evaluate – there's no rush! Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Bugger. Alarm bells everywhere and I didn't pick up. Well, thank you for being nice about it. What is the best way to check for copyvio? Is there a preferred procedure used by users such as yourself? Triptothecottage (talk) 09:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We all make mistakes; the trick is probably not to repeat them too often. Two basic techniques for this: if you see a patently unencyclopaedic phrase such as "the thrill of blazing your own trail", just Google it (with the quotes); and before accepting any draft, please run it through this tool (check the Turnitin box before you run it). Either of those would have shown you part of the problem here, but not the translational copyvio from the French version of the website, the stuff about Waz – you'd have needed to be actively looking for problems to see that. Oh, and several other reviewers looked at the page without flagging the copyvio, too. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:20, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

KOF Index of Globalization
KOF Index of Globalization has been deleted. Primefac (talk) 13:46, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Triptothecottage (talk) 03:54, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Message
Hello Triptothecottage,

You recently evaluated my submission on the wikipedia article page "Falcon's Creative Group." Thank you for your time! I was wondering if you could provide a bit more clarity on your comment "Most of the references that have been added appear to be very much incidental coverage - none of them are in-depth coverage of the company itself."

I've taken a look at what was sourced and I agree, the page could use more in-depth coverage sources. However, I wanted to just check and see if this was the only concern. There are more notable mentions of the company that I will look into, but I just wanted to make sure that there was nothing else significant before I resubmit. Also, do you have any examples or specifics that you think would count as a notable submission. I understand that Wikipedia has a page on this and I have read it, but I have also been referencing other Wikipedia pages that have been approved and what sources they use and many of their sources are around the same legitamacy as the ones used on this page.

I am not questioning or antagonizing your comment, I just want to make sure I have all the information needed to try and improve the page for a more successful resubmission.

Thanks!


 * Thanks for taking the time to ask this! First off, I need to make sure that you don't have a conflict of interest with the subject of the article. If you do, and let us know, it will make us easier for us to help you edit without breaking any rules. See WP:DCOI for details.


 * If you don't have a COI, then here are some general tips for notability. We need sources that specifically cover the subject itself - the Orlando Business Journal is a good example. If you can find a few more of those types of articles - instead of tangential mentions in articles about theme parks - that would go a long way to notability.


 * One more thing - when you leave a message on my talk page, or any other talk pages, please sign your name by adding four tildes (like this ~ ), which will add a date and time automatically as well. Thanks! Triptothecottage (talk) 22:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Triptothecottage,


 * I greatly appreciate the response and your willingness to assist me, further. First off, yes, I do have a COI with the subject material as I work for the company in question. I have no desire to try and hide this from you and I also have absolutely NO intention of breaking the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia. I do genuinely believe that this article can be written in a factual, objective, and notable manner that will be of use to everyday users and I welcome any assistance you may provide.


 * I am in the process of looking out for more sources that are similar to the Orlando Business Journal, but in your view, does anything need to be altered further, given my COI? Please let me know, I look forward to hearing back from you.


 * Sincerely,
 * Boxx96 (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I do very much appreciate your honesty. However, as it turns out, I'm really at the end of my expertise in this particular case. While the article is not, in my opinion, irredeemably promotional, there is a consensus that editors like yourself should not create draft articles. What I am going to ask you to do first, therefore, is follow the instructions at WP:COIPAYDISCLOSE (or WP:DCOI if you're not specifically being paid to promote the company), which will add a note to the talk page of your draft, and will make sure other reviewers are aware of both your COI and your honesty. Then, you should ask your questions at the Articles for Creation Help Desk, which will bring the article to the attention of very experienced reviewers and editors, and we'll get their opinion on how best to proceed.


 * Thanks once again, and I hope all goes well for you. Triptothecottage (talk) 00:00, 18 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Triptothecottage,


 * Thanks for the heads up and all your help through this process. I'll take a look at what you've linked me and regroup over the next few weeks to figure out how I can tackle this in an effective way that is compatible with Wikipedia's guidelines.


 * I really appreciate your help!


 * Sincerely,
 * Boxx96 (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Khun Srun
Dear Triptothecottage, why do say I'm vandalizing Wkipedia ? I'm a scholar, specialist of Cambodian literature. I think you are to fast. Please have a look on the page. I wrote it all !! With best regards, Domrey sar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domrey sar (talk • contribs) 04:44, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Soth Polin
Dear Triptothecottage, I am the one who wrote the text ! I'm a specialist of Khmer literature. My work was published first in a french magazine "Revue Europe" in 2003 and then translated into english in "manoa journal " (Muse) in 2004. Could you help me to remove this "Investigation of potential copyright issue" please. It's to complicated for me. The same happened with "Hak Chhay Hok" one hour ago, I received a warning about "biography of living persons" and the writer is dead during Pol Pot!! I'm quite tired and sad. I spent hours and hours to write in wikipedia about Khmer Writers. I think I will stop doing it. Domrey sar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domrey sar (talk • contribs) 08:59, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * If that's true, you may be ok. I'm sorry that editing Wikipedia hasn't been a positive experience so far for you. The reason editors like myself are concerned is of course because the text appears to be largely the same, and that's not allowed if you didn't write the text yourself. As a matter of fact, we very much appreciate your expert knowledge and I'd like to help you deal with these problems.


 * What you need to do is this: follow all the instructions at WP:IOWN, for each of your articles. I know it might seem a bit complicated and tedious, but it will help other editors to understand why your text is very similar. It would be very worthwhile for you to rescue your contributions (which, as you say, are a lot of work). There are some other issues with your articles but they can be fixed later.


 * One more thing: when you leave a message on talk pages like this one, or on an article's talk page, please sign your name by adding ~ to the end of your message. It will be automatically replaced with your name and the date and time. Hope this helped. Triptothecottage (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Soth Polin
Dear Triptothecottage, your are very "formal". When people are very "formal", sometimes it's because there are very "personal". Maybe it's because I wrote to you "why do you say I'm vandalizing Wkipedia ? I think you are to fast. Please have a look on the page." And you decided to look with A LOT OF ATTENTION ! You know I was not vandalizing Wikipedia. You know I'm doing my best to write in Reviews, Literary, Journal, and now in Wikipedia in order to promote the work of Cambodian writers (95% of them died during Pol Pot's Regime) You know it will be "a bit complicated and tedious" to resolve this copyright problem. You don't want to help me. Domrey sar (talk) 09:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of KOF Index of Globalization
Hello! Your submission of KOF Index of Globalization at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mifter (talk) 05:50, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that didn't go too well, did it? About, I agree with : you don't need to withdraw from AfC, just to be a little more routinely suspicious of extended texts with a "ready-made" look to them. In my opinion, a copyright check should in any case be an obligatory step in AfC review. Looking at the comments on this page, it seems to me that you have plenty to offer in that area if you decide to return to it. In any case, if at any time you want a second pair of eyes on a possible copyvio, feel free to ping me. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Jing Tian
Which part was deflamatory?

I wrote with the correct supporting sources, good and reliable references. Furthermore I said "Chinese Audience" attributed her success due to that relationship, I was merely doing translation of the sources.

What's wrong? Are you a fan of Jing Tian? Why are you abusing your authorithy?

Brazilian Tiger (talk) 08:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

No reply?

Please do not abuse your authorithy to defend your idol. Thanks. =)

Brazilian Tiger (talk) 11:56, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Request on 11:23:05, 22 February 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Neneway
Hi you recently reviewed my proposed page BBC Children's and suggested I visited this page and made it better CBBC - I'm happy to do this and I think it's a good suggestion. I have made a start. I think the page should be renamed BBC Children's so not to be confused with CBBC_(TV_channel)which is actually a better explanation of CBBC as it currently is today. BBC Children's is the department that manages the two TV channels CBBC and CBeebies and I improving the CBBC page to explain it covers these two services and to clarify how it came about. Can you help me rename the page please if you agree? Neneway (talk) 11:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your contributions and trying to help out with this topic. I've had a much much closer look at what is going on with this topic and I'm beginning to understand the distinction between these subjects. As a matter of fact, I do not recommend you make the changes I originally suggested, as they are clearly distinct entities. However, the article is still not ready for inclusion in the encyclopaedia as you have not provided any evidence of its notability. For this requirement to be met you will have to provide sources from outside the BBC that demonstrate the existence of this department and cover it in some detail. See BBC Television for the kind of references that are required.


 * Also, if you have a conflict of interest with this subject you are required to disclose it. I mention this only because you seem to have a particular interest in this topic. If you don't, no problem. If you do, and you need help with what to do, let me know. Triptothecottage (talk) 00:46, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Dealing with your question about conflict of interest I can disclose I worked for this organisation some years ago. I consider myself a Subject-matter expert making Assume Good Faith edits but happy to read your view on whether I should request the changes for other people to make instead. I note that there is a WikiProject for the BBC pages. Are you a member of WikiProject_BBC? I will also make my suggestions for these changes to them if not. Neneway (talk) 09:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * That sounds fine, that's not the kind of conflict of interest we are worried about. Yes, it's probably a good idea to discuss this subject at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject BBC. They will have much more idea about this than me - I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the BBC at all. Hope this helped. Triptothecottage (talk) 08:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

re: Thomas Campbell (Australian politician)
Hello Triptothecottage,

The edit in question which prompted you to contact me was a hyper link to the town of Westport, Mayo, Ireland being the birthplace of my gg grandmother, Mary Campbell (nee Hanley). Further, re: copyright, if you noticed I provided information to the Qld Parliament in the first instance re: my gg grandfather, Thomas Campbell, and therefore it does not or should not fall within the definition of breach (of Wiki copyright). Accordingly, it would be greatly appreciated if you lift the current status of Thomas's Wiki page (eg. it is blocked or the like).

Thank you. Kind regards,

bwsg70 25/2/2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwsg70 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Please explain the situation at this page. An administrator will asses the situation from here. Unfortunately, it is often very difficult to tell who the owner of the copyright is. In this case, I have sent it for investigation because it may be the case that only some of the material is copyright. Please ask if you have any more questions. Triptothecottage (talk) 12:14, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


 * That's a tad authoritarian, this is my original work, indeed a significant increase on the original brief, which I have, as indicated, provided to the Qld Parliament. There was no need for you to interject in the first instance and send it for investigation if you carried out some basic checks.  Very disappointing.  I write not merely from a historical standpoint as per my history undergrad from university, but more precisely based on core evidence.  Again, very disappointing that you decided to interject without some basic checks and asking.  Perhaps this is why you step on toes and thus issues become messy when they don't have to in the first instance.  Please revert the page to its initial status.  User:bwsg70


 * Incidentally, the onus should not be on me to explain myself further via an additional process as instigated by you. Common sense surely must prevail.  All the best.  Regards, bwsg70 (aka Brendan Garner, that is if you actually wish to check the Qld Parliament link). User:bwsg70

ANI listing
Please refer to this discussion. El_C 13:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

You will live to regret this!
I do have a verifiable citation thank you very much. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1329668/quotes?item=qt1453399 Now for a very swift apology or I will be writing you up a citation. Quickly now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.4.79 (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * If you have a verifiable citation for information in an article, then feel free to add it to the article. Triptothecottage (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , you should know that IMDb can never be used as a reference in Wikipedia, as it is not a reliable source. The tone of your message here is less than polite. I sincerely hope that it is supposed to be in some way humorous (if so, fail!). Threatening language is not tolerated, please be more courteous. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Request on 02:26:55, 6 March 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Dinghanliang
Hi, I'm writing in to ask, what do you meant by my page is still not coming from a neutral point of view? As i have footnote all from third party website. I need more details, Thank you.

Dinghanliang (talk) 02:26, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The problem is not so much with the references - although they are problematic - but rather with the tone of the article. It focuses too much on features and advertising material rather than objective facts about the company. Triptothecottage (talk) 20:56, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, I have already re submitted my article during 10th of march. I'm just wondering if it's working this time. I have edited to content to not so much on advertising and i've citation based on web that are coming from actual user experiences. Dinghanliang (talk) 05:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi Triptothecottage. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3ATriptothecottage enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:01, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

BLP PROD
Just an FYI, WP:BLPPROD requires that there be no sources, broadly construed, when the tag is placed. Even if the source is not reliable, if it exists in the article, BLP PROD cannot be placed. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:07, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah my bad. I misconstrued it as requiring a reliable source. I'll not tag those in future. Thanks for letting me know! Triptothecottage (talk) 00:12, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. They can only be removed when reliable sources are added, but any source prevents the tag from being placed. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:13, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Review of AfC Draft
Thank you for your review of the Marsh-Warthen House draft. I am attempting to merge with an existing earlier article which is many years old and very incomplete. I knew the authors at the time. They were consultants in the restoration process in starting the house museum. I think they have retired, but I would welcome their input. I have been involved with the project since the beginning and and still involved. (DavidPatBoyle (talk) 17:17, 31 March 2017 (UTC))
 * Thanks for doing that, it's a significant improvement to the article. I'm not sure what you're talking about with the "very old" article as it was only created in January this year. Anyway, I will finish off the merge process for you by cleaning up some loose ends on both the old and new pages. HOWEVER, I would very much like you to read WP:COI and WP:DCOI in particular, as you do seem to have something of a conflict of interest. This is not a serious issue if you're not being paid to edit Wikipedia but please become familiar with these policies anyway .Triptothecottage (talk) 22:39, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Issuing level 1 warning about removing AfD template from articles before the discussion is complete. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Power management keys. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I  Talk to my owner :Online 04:32, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * If anyone's reading this it's a little bit of April 1 confusion: I closed Articles for deletion/Power management keys/AFD as a joke nom (using XfD closer, which removed the article tag automatically) without realising there was an actual AfD happening. Sorry bot; sorry everyone. All seems well now. Triptothecottage (talk) 05:59, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Late Paravur Sadanandan Pillai
Hello Triptothecottage. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Late Paravur Sadanandan Pillai, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: bad English aside, the article claims the significance of the subject and a quick GBooks search confirms there might be coverage. Thank you.  So Why  13:20, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Triptothecottage (talk) 13:21, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Facts have to be right!
I told you I cannot work this talk thing out so only know how to do a new section and not how to continue on a thread.

Anyway, I have no idea who you are but let me explain.

Firstly, if something is written about someone that is inaccurate then it can be and absolutely should be corrected and if not then that person can and really should sue. Nothing should be published in the first place if the person who wrote it hasn’t checked their facts. It says on the edit that you should not solely rely on newspaper sources as they are not a given for necessarily being correct.

It is quite absurd to say that the person who it is written about cannot be the one to correct inaccuracies as they are the very people that can and absolutely should. For example, you say I was 11 when moved NO I was 10. FACT! You wrongly call me an environmental activist yet I am not and have never named myself as such as I am a multi award winning campaigner and registered journalist. FACT! You have also misrepresented the references to the health problems and made some inaccurate comments there as well which I will not stand for. The person who knows these correct facts is of course me or can I not point out such inaccuracies as I have a conflict of interest!!! What a farce. Put it this way if I wrote a page about you and made up all sorts of rubbish about your age, your job title, your health problems etc. and then you knew it was wrong and so wanted it corrected and I said no because you are not allowed to point out the correct facts here, can you not see how totally ludicrous that is.

Also you say it cannot be included that there is a petition as it is not sourced. Well apart from the fact that the person who wrote it is informing you then you can take your pick of which links you want to include for that or is it only reliable if it appears in the Guardian? In fact I tried to put in the link to the petition (which would be an independent website to me) but it would not let me and so had to just refer to it being on my website.

I am simply bemused as to how someone can come along who knows nothing about me and my campaign and work and who clearly does not know the facts and just takes his or her info from newspaper articles! I know from direct experience that newspaper articles don't always get it right and it was one of the reasons I became a journalist myself because of inaccuracies in some of the media reporting.

As said previously, I have already informed Wikipedia in an email that I will not and never had stood for factual inaccuracy in any aspect of my work. If the various changes I have made and quite rightly so to correct the inaccuracies and misrepresentation continue to be deleted then I shall have no choice but to take this further and will need to find out about legal complaints.

I am not sure what part of the world you are in but here in the UK it is nearly 6am and seeing as I have wasted a number of hours on all this and already had enough important work to do to try and protect the health of the people the campaign represents then I am now going to sleep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thefactcorrecter (talk • contribs) 04:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Facts have to be right!
I know for a fact you have various things wrong in what you have written on the Georgina Downs page. You also appear to be intent on playing down the campaign referred to, for example, where is the usual link to the website of the campaign, as such websites would usually always appear in the Wikipedia pages of others profiled.

I really cannot get this talk thing to work and it has taken me an hour or so to type this much. Therefore I want to email the points to you regarding this piece. In any event I have emailed Wikipedia direct to point out the seriousness of having inaccuracies about a person in any of Wikipedia's pages as it is not acceptable and a person can obviously take it further legally if inaccuracies and misrepresentations are not corrected when pointed out.

Please can you let me know your email as I can forward you the email I sent directly to Wikipedia. Thanks.

Thefactcorrecter (talk) 04:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It is the goal of everyone at Wikipedia to provide accurate and reliable information about important topics in an encyclopaedic fashion. Let me address each of your concerns individually. Where I provide a link it will show more information about Wikipedia's policies and procedures.
 * I rewrote the article significantly a couple of weeks ago using only the information I could find in reliable sources about Downs. That is why I stripped out a number of references to the campaign website, as sources need to be independent of the topic to be considered reliable. When you say you "know for a fact" some of these things are wrong, it is considered original research and can't be accepted unless you back it up with a source. Otherwise it is not verifiable and therefore not suitable for an encyclopaedia.
 * I am not attempting to "play down" the campaign. I am attempting instead to adhere to a neutral point of view. This is best accomplished by only providing information from independent sources and not adding any other material about the importance of the campaign.
 * I have added a link at the bottom of the article to the UK Pestcides Campaign website in accordance with Wikipedia's policy about external links.
 * I am not obliged to provide you with my email address. If you wish to respond, please do so here by adding a message to the bottom of the page. WP:CHEATSHEET may help you with formatting etc.
 * I am not sure which Wikipedia email address you have contacted but it is unlikely to be much help, as Wikipedia is maintained and edited by volunteers like you and I.
 * If you believe there are serious misrepresentations of Georgina Downs on the page, please discuss them on the article's talk page by adding a message the same way you did here. You must also provide independent sources.
 * Lastly, if you have a conflict of interest or are connected in any way with the subject of the article, please disclose it immediately.
 * Thank you for your time, and I hope you will understand the importance of making sure information on Wikipedia is unbiased and reliable. Triptothecottage (talk) 04:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I have had a response from Ms Downs on my talk page. It's going to take me a while reply to it, but I just wanted to say that I don't think you've done anything particularly wrong here and I have to AGF that you were trying to help the encyclopedia. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your intervention and assistance with the article itself. Oddly enough I read your essay on what newbies think of templates just the other day, before this all blew up. So, with that in mind, what would be a better way to respond to this situation: new account makes edits to page that strongly suggest a conflict of interest? Or rather, what would you have done? Triptothecottage (talk) 00:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think you did anything wrong with regards editing the article - AGF and all that. The best essay to read is WP:DOLT in my view, which basically says that the real world intersects Wikipedia life in ways that are unpredictable and need to be handled with care. In terms of what I would do here, I would probably look for sources for any unsourced content, then if the problem persisted, go straight to WP:BLPN. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:59, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted
Hello Triptothecottage. Your account has been added to the " " user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk. The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. S warm  ♠  15:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
 * Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
 * Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

01:53:32, 19 April 2017 review of submission by BobbleheadSockPup
Hi! Was hoping you could elaborate more on your criticisms, which by the way are much appreciated! 1. Could you be a little more specific on the areas where you feel it is too promotional? 2. Also, what other types of sources would you consider "helpful", and helpful to which aspect of the article(notability or neutrality?) I've deliberately avoided press releases and focused more on scouring industry-targeted publications, unless even those are not considered neutral enough. Thanks and best regards! BobbleheadSockPup (talk) 01:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Bobbleheadsockpup
 * I'll do my best to respond to all your questions so this could be a bit of a long read. But first of all, I have a couple of questions for you. First, where does your username come from? It seems to imply quite strongly that you're a sockpuppet of, which is very much against WP's policies, and I think I and others would appreciate clarification here. Second, are you being paid to edit this article or do you have any sort of conflict of interest? Please don't be offended by these questions, it's just better to have these things in the open. On to your questions:


 * In the Services section, I note the use of words like "extensive" to describe the network, and descriptions of services "available only in select countries". They sound like they're off the company's website (oh, and if they are copied directly, then it's a copyright violation).
 * The sources you have are pretty good, I just made that comment in the hope there might be more. You can never have too many sources.


 * Hope this answered some of your questions. Let me know if you have any more. Triptothecottage (talk) 02:48, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Triptothecottage, apologies if this is not formatted correctly but im trying my best! And no worries at all, your worries arecompletely understandable :) Re:username: Absolutely not a sockpuppet of anybody. My desk has many bobblehead figurines (im a collector) and i just watched an episode of Mr Robots on sockpuppets and put them together. I had absolutely no idea Bobblehead was a user. Oh dear, i think i should change my username. Conflict: Not being paid, no conflict of interest. Just a regular civilian with an interest in the project. Just decided to take on a relatively easy writeup to start.

On the article: Agreed on the services section, I had a feeling that this section might be problematic in spite of my best efforts. Will relook them. Are there any other areas you are concerned with?

BobbleheadSockPup (talk) 02:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Bobbleheadsockpup


 * Not a problem at all, I'm assuming good faith and I have no reason to believe this isn't an honest mistake as far as the username goes. It's just that "sockpuppetry" (the abuse of multiple accounts to vandalise or otherwise hurt the encyclopedia) is a pretty common and damaging problem. So I'd definitely recommend changing your username; you can make a request here. It just might save you these question in future!


 * As for your formatting, you're doing a fine job. When you're signing your post, you only need to place the four tildes, as you have been, and they'll add the username link automatically. The other thing is that if you edit this page, you'll see I've started each paragraph with a colon which indents the paragraph one space. Convention on Wikipedia is to indent each reply another level - so, for instance, when you reply to this message, you should place two colons before anything else at the start of the paragraph. It just helps keep discussions on track!


 * Finally, as far as the article is concerned, just go through it with a fine tooth-comb and look for any words that look like you might find them in an advertisement or a press release. The other thing, as far as sources are concerned, is I'd like to see a few more sources which talk about the company itself as their primary focus. These might be a bit hard to find but they'll help in establishing notability


 * Thanks for your contributions, and if you have any other questions about Wikipedia, feel free to ask! I'll answer them if I can or send you the way of someone who might be able to help. Triptothecottage (talk) 07:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

FEX Global
You have deleted my start with no opportunity to appeal your deletion. The company has been granted a market license by the Australian government so I fail to see how you could claim invalid or not able to be verified Bin Prince (talk) 12:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a policy called notability. This is how we decide what is and isn't suitable to be included in the encyclopaedia. The reason I requested the deletion of your article was because nothing in the article made any suggestion that the company was significant in its field. Its existence is not sufficient reason to include it in the encyclopaedia. If you would like to create the article with more sources that prove its notability, I suggest you start it as a draft via Articles for Creation, where you can get feedback from reviewers without the risk of deletion. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:23, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is disappointing and does not give me confidence in the processes at Wikipedia. After considering your comment I looked at several pages of companies that I know well and the site was littered with inaccuracies. Seems a bit of fake news on Wikipedia and the same as everything that has such strong vested interests. Its very disappointing that you are encouraging puffery and self promotion instead of plain fact which is what I wrote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bin Prince (talk • contribs) 23:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * We are absolutely not encouraging puffery and self promotion, in fact, these policies are designed to ensure Wikipedia does not become promotional. Everyone on here is a volunteer and our community is simply trying to create an encyclopaedia which is a reliable source of information. Would you mind mentioning which of these companies you think have issues? I'm more than happy to take a look at them. Everything on Wikipedia has to be verifiable, which simply means we have to be able to find it in a reliable source. So, if there's any information that doesn't meet this standard, it can be changed. Your knowledge, unfortunately, isn't a suitable source, as it's considered original research and not permitted, though I understand your frustrations. As for your article, I'll repeat what I said before and suggest your create it at Articles for Creation, where you can create the article and get feedback on the sources you're using, and, when the article is ready, it can be promoted into the main encyclopaedia. If you have any questions about doing this feel free to ask. Triptothecottage (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately as I pointed out in the initial description the company has a market license from a regulator - ergo the source of the information is readily discoverable via a very quick check on the regulator web site. it beggars belief that you would not consider that a 'reliable source' . A government regulators website I would have thought would be one of the best possible sources to check reliance. A simple check on the website ? I'm disappointed with this process and I reiterate that there appears that no effort was made whatsoever to check the 'reliable source' . Puffery prevails and from my perspective I have lost confidence in Wikipedia. No doubt your return response will be more of the same. Has Trump taken over the site ? Puffery and fake news. I was beginning to build on a legitimate topic with legitimate easily verifiable sources and you rejected it out of hand. I repeat what I said before that it beggars belief that you have allowed ridiculous content and puffery to remain on every one of the sites I looked at. A statistical phenomena or a clear indication of imbalance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bin Prince (talk • contribs) 02:31, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree with you that a government regulation website is a reliable source, and it is perhaps my fault for not explaining very how that fitted your situation. Every article on Wikipedia should pass what is called the General Notability Guideline, which says that the subjects of Wikipedia articles have to have significant coverage in multiple sources independent of the subject. So, the regulator's statement, which I've found is reliable and independent, sure, but it's only one source, so it's not multiple, and it's hardly significant coverage because it only tells me that the company exists and it has a licence to operate an energy market. It doesn't tell me anything about the company itself, who runs it, its history, etc, etc. If, for example, you could find two in-depth newspaper profiles of the company in addition to the regulator's statement, that would probably confirm its notability. So, I'll point out to you again that you can create your article via Articles for Creation, develop it, get feedback on it, and when it is ready, it can be accepted into the encyclopaedia. Certainly, it is a little more effort, but because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, we have to create standards for what we do and do not accept. If you wish to go ahead with this process, and have any questions, feel free to ask. Triptothecottage (talk) 04:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Discuss
So i tagged because there was not reliable source in it.It seemed as if it had been for promotion. &mdash;  Adnan Enaya Afzal  talk  12:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That doesn't seem like an appropriate use of the criterion to me. I quote from G11: pages must be "exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten" to be encyclopaedic. Nowhere in the criterion does it mention reliable sources. And Laws of London seems neutral as far as I can discern. It doesn't have any deletion history so there's no evidence of POV-pushing. Furthermore, none of the A7 categories cover this: if it were to be deleted for notability issues, it would have to be via PROD or AfD. For the record, as I posted on your talk page, I think the subject might be notable, but I'm not well versed enough in British legal history to research this properly., , I know you've both stalked this talk page at times, do either of you have an opinion? Triptothecottage (talk) 12:40, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! That page surely had problems, but I can't see how G11 could in any way have been thought to apply – there wasn't anything remotely promotional about it., are you sure that you have a sufficient command of English to be editing English Wikipedia? By the way, I'm sure the topic fully merits an article here, but – rightly or wrongly – have redirected it to Anglo-Saxon London for now. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:25, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

RE: Humanz Tour 2017
Thank you for voicing your concerns; I'm not connected with Gorillaz, Damon Albarn, or any of their affiliate projects in any way, I just decided to make a proper account to fix up a few Gorillaz articles as a fan. Regarding Humanz Tour 2017:


 * All information on the page was sourced from press releases provided by the band. Live roster info was sourced from footage of their Printworks concert in London, which is difficult to cite (if you don't know what Seye Adelekan looks like, footage of him performing at a Gorillaz concert isn't a very good citation).
 * I used Escape to Plastic Beach Tour as a template for this page; would the need for improved citation carry over to that page as well? FlotillaFlotsam (talk) 12:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a problem with being a fan! I hope you understand I prefer to ask in these situations. As far as your citations are concerned, I understand the difficulties of getting a hold of the information, but just for future reference, press releases are not the best sources for Wikipedia, because they always seek to promote the subject and so the information they provide might not be entirely accurate. Had you not included the Billboard article, I would not have been convinced that the subject of the article was notable, which is a key policy explaining what deserves an article on Wikipedia. So when you're creating articles in future, try to include as many indepedent reliable sources as possible. And as for Escape to Plastic Becah Tour, those citations are actually in slightly worse shape (mostly because they're just bare URLs), so I'm heading over to take a look at that now. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:49, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

ICO List of Careers in the United States
Thank you for posting concern about the article created, the information given here does seem to be indiscriminate, since this is my first article, I am definitely open to any adjustments to the article. If you can explain what you mean by not meeting the criteria for inclusion, I will be happy to fix it. PacoTac0 (talk) 12:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the message very much. So, this may get a bit complicated, but bear with me, and have a read of each of the policies and essays which I link to. First of all, each article on Wikipedia must meet a general standard called notability. This is the test applied to work out whether something is worthy of an article or not. One of the policies which helps decide whether something is notable is called Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Basically, I believe that your article is indiscriminate because there's no standard applied to the items that are included in the list, and no source which gives us any indication that this specific list of items might be important in any way. I am (sorry!) going to nominate the article for deletion at Articles for Deletion, where a week-long discussion about the article will take place. In the meantime, I'd suggest that your next article is created via Articles for Creation, because that will give you a chance to get feedback on the content and sources of the article from reviewers like me without the risk of it getting deleted. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. Triptothecottage (talk) 12:19, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Alan M. Wald
Hi there. A user is asking for feedback / explanation about tags you placed on this article, please take a look and respond as needed. Regards  So Why  11:48, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Redirect request: Fryed chicken proof
here are some links where pepole use fryed insted of fried Southern Fryed Chicken in enland google trends in fryed chicken Thank You for doing the review And a telling me why

Jacktime34 (talk) 23:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Two of those sources don't exist, and the other one is just another mention of the restaurant. Triptothecottage (talk) 06:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Please do not redirect the page Causes of Islamic Terrorism
I just learned u reviewed the page Causes of Islamic Terrorism and redirected it to Islamic terrorism. I believe those reason is so much important and a separate page is needed for detail observation. Where i witnessed day by day many Muslims taking the path of destruction and claiming its the Islam or they way of life. Its also killing many innocent lives, non Muslims or Muslims. Only the right information can stop a suicide bomber not gor for a blast. So its our duty to put those information in web in a proper way. The page was under developed And i promise its will help Muslims to stop supporting the extremism. So please dont redirect, and you can look after the page after some day. I promise the page will be resourceful. If than Its dont carry the rules of Wikipedia you can do anything. So I hope you will reconsider your decisions  for the greater purpose of the page. After submitting my topic i am seeing link after my name - some marketing - those links are not my doing Aziz Tarak.
 * Your article was moved to Draft space where it can be worked on without the risk of being deleted. Triptothecottage (talk) 06:27, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Women's Knockout Cup
Thanks for bringing to my attention the copyright infringement on this page when writing the history. The page I was referencing was very well written and had a good history of the competition. I have had a go at re-write the history to "put it in my own words" and hope this avoids the need for the page to be deleted. If possible it would be good to get the warning removed from the page. NZ Footballs Conscience (talk) 00:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It seems that has done a particularly excellent scalpel job in removing the offending parts of the text. In future, be aware that copy and pasting is not allowed, and nor is close paraphrasing, no matter how good or useful the original source. Otherwise, thanks for your contributions and enjoy continuing to improve your page! Triptothecottage (talk) 06:23, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the compliment, but it wasn't me - I simply added categories. Grutness...wha?  06:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops... thanks ! Triptothecottage (talk) 06:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

The Virginian (TV series)
Hi.

I see you have deleted my adding about this serie in March.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Virginian_(TV_series)&diff=771500566&oldid=771500441

You reason was, I quote you:

"Unnecessary and unsourced information"

Are you seriously asking people to source everything? Because dear collegue, in that case we must source each sentence we wrote about any article if we go like that!!!

Do you think that when I add "DVD contains only english audio and no close captions nor any subtitles." is a statement which deserves to be sourced? Because I'm afraid that thousands of wikipedia pages which have such information without any source must all be edited by you at once. And who are you to declare that this VALUABLE information is unnecessary? Please think 1 minute about your statement "unnecessary". Again who are you to declare that? Are you aware that planet earth is made of a lot of countries which do not have english as primary language? Do you know that many people are not fluent in english to be able to follow an english talk? Are you aware that even among english native people some are deaf/hearing impaired and do not hear anything and are REALLY interested to know if the DVD/Bluray they are about to buy contains closed captions/subtitles?

Sorry to be a bit tough but such valuable information, in the specific DVD section is all but unnecessary. I'm amazed, if not shocked, to see moderators moderating anything, even the smallest sentence, because to their eyes, this add nothing and would not be sourced. But please come on, type "The Virginian dvd closed captions" in google and see what you get. You want people to source what is available in 2 seconds?

And what irritates me at the utmost in this story is that you reproach me this unnecessary and unsourced sentence BUT at the VERY SAME TIME, what do you read in the VERY SAME section (DVD Releases) ONE LIVE ABOVE, I copy paste:

"The release is presented with original English audio with German subtitles, as well as a German-dubbed soundtrack."

So this sentence was already here for months or years for the german DVD, WITHOUT SOURCE, then myself I add the information for the English DVD version, suddenly my add is unnecessary and unsourced.


 * clap*clap*clap*

This is what irritates me A LOT. To be a moderator does NOT mean you must moderate at all cost, especially when 1 line, I mean ONE LINE above mine, there are similar information. Information VERY VALUABLE for ALL PEOPLE around the world, not fluent in english or deaf/hearing impaired.

Best Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB00:349:3200:5CA7:6CC0:78F2:6553 (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. While it probably was a touch unfair to call the information "unnecessary", it was certainly true that it was "unsourced". Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable by reliable sources, and if that means a citation for every sentence, so be it. Original research, which is when you add information that you have personally worked out, is not allowed. In other words, if you have a source, feel free to add the information. Triptothecottage (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Citadel of Ricks: Hi, my past is not a hoax or vandalism. It is a fictional tv show. If you could message my FaceBook at Blake Gale with the Ranma picture, that would great, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blakegale (talk • contribs) 23:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Joshua Rajan
Hello, could you look at the sources for this and let me know if they mention the subject or his band, EUPHONY OFFICIAL? I don't think they do, but was going blind from fatigue. If they do not so mention, please let me know. thanks, Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:07, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Your CSD nomination
Why did you tag this article with attack?. Lil Johnny (talk) (contribs) 04:10, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a little slanty, but does not meet WP:CSD. Needs more neutral tone.Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4
Hello ,

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

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

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Amy Mali Hicks
Hello Triptothecottage. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Amy Mali Hicks, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Please give them more than two minutes to assert notability -- there are already two sources. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:47, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

The Signpost: 15 July 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: MyHighSchoolInternship.Org
Hello! This page should not be speedily deleted because it has been added to enrich this encyclopedia which will benefit the readers worldwide. There is nothing obnoxious or wrong in this article and the rules of wikipedia has been followed. It does not promote any person, organization etc. It is about world's first massive open online interships academy which provide free platform and free access to internships to high school students worldwide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saumesh Sahar (talk • contribs) 23:36, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Benjamin Smith Wales Green Party
Sorry Trip to the cottage, it was a complete accident. But I would please ask you to reconsider again on the deletion of Benjamin Smith Deputy Leader of the Welsh Green Party. He's an up and coming politician and being made a deputy leader at 19, surely shows he'll do great things. Thank you (Onceinablue (talk) 07:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC))

Practice Ignition
Hey Triptothecottage,

Any tips on how I can go about getting Practice Ignition published? It took me a long time to get that page together and learning the Wiki syntax.

I didn't mean to hide anything - I do work for Practice Ignition. It's a real company with over $6 million in funding and is making waves in the accounting world.

Let me know what I can do!


 * Hey mate, thanks for the message. Basically you have two separate problems here. Check out the links I'll give if you need any more info.


 * Firstly, to have an article on Wikipedia, a subject has to be notable. In practice we use the general notability guideline to decide if something meets the criteria. A subject has to have substantial coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independentof each other and the topic. I've done some research on Practice Ignition and I don't think it's quite ready for an article. I can find one in-depth AFR piece about your company, but anything else appears to be a press release or just an incidental mention. If you can prove me wrong with better sources, leave them here and I'll take a look.


 * The other issue was that you have a conflict of interest. Generally speaking, we ask that you don't write about your business or something that you're strongly connected with. It can be difficult for you to maintain a neutral point of view which is the other reason your article was deleted. The best way around this, in my opinion, is to create a draft article at articles for creation, where it won't be deleted on sight if it has issues, it'll just be reviewed and returned to drafting by someone like myself. We can help you declare your conflict of interest there too.


 * In short: better sources, less advertising. Feel free to ask if you need me to clarify anything. (Also, when you leave a message, pur four tildes ~ at the end to leave your name and the date automatically.) Triptothecottage (talk) 21:48, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 August 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

template deletion
Sorry, and thanks for catching this - I accidentally deleted the wrong template. I meant to delete the Celts template, as it has little or nothing to do with the content of the Feis article. Hohenloh + 12:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC) No worries – appreciate your efforts! Triptothecottage (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Brendanz Dystopia
Hello Triptothecottage, I am here to see if you have any suggestions as to how I can make my article better fit Wikipedia's guidelines. It is not a promotion, and definitely not a disambiguous one. I believe that it is significant, as do many others. Any suggestions you can give to help me to get this page up to standards would be greatly appreciated. Cheers. Reidsome (talk) 03:51, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't think there is anything you can do, as I don't think Brendanz Dystopia is not notable. Notability is the criterion used on Wikipedia to decide what is worthy of an article. If a subject does not have substantial coverage in multiple sources that are independent of the subject, the article will probably be deleted. When I google Brendanz Dystopia, for instance, I don't see anything about the channel, only a few videos. YouTube channels many, many times more popular than this one do not have Wikipedia articles for the same reason. If I were you I would not attempt to recreate the article now – maybe sometime in the future. Feel free to stay though, and to help improve other content on Wikipedia. Triptothecottage (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

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

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

Ways to improve 2017 National League Wild Card Game
Hi, I'm Boleyn. Triptothecottage, thanks for creating 2017 National League Wild Card Game!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add your sources. If the 'external links' are actually sources, please make this clear in the article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey, as a fellow NPR I know this problem with Page Curation – sending messages to the wrong person. You might want to leave a more with, because he's the one who actually expanded it from the redirect. Triptothecottage (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry,. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 05:15, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Irish stepdance
I like your improvements to Irish stepdance, though I have one little nit to pick. You mention that bubble heels were banned, but it's not clear that heel clicks remain a significant part of competition stepdance since then. Also, were heel clicks actually unknown before fiberglass heels? I have a pair of non-irish-dance shoes with leather heels which produce an audible click, though not nearly as loud as my Irish step shoes. And was wood never used to make heels more audible? Argyriou (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback! On the last question: none of the sources which I have mention anything about wood, which in hindsight does seem odd. Of course, that's the broader problem – rarely does anyone write anything about hard shoes! As for the clicks, I will have a go at rewriting that to make it clear that clicks existed before and after that episode. Triptothecottage (talk) 20:43, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

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

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

Email
-Thibbs (talk) 13:16, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for St Collins Lane
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Moors
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Moors. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Your help desk question
You didn't get a response, but Talk:Railways in Melbourne may be one place to find out what is appropriate. As for whether a certain procedure should be followed on articles in general, maybe WP:VPM.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice, bust I got a response at Help talk:Citation Style 1. Triptothecottage (talk) 22:57, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:White
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:White. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

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

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

The Signpost: 23 October 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

19:55:29, 6 November 2017 review of submission by Ajmeldem
Hi Triptothecottage. First of all, thank you for your work on this amazing platform. Second, I wanted to check in with you regarding my articles, which you have declined. The given reason was that I used press releases. The fact is, none of the sources are press releases nor are they controlled by the subject of the article. All of the sources are from independent news channels or organizations. I hope that this is proof enough that my article is not at all meant as advertisement. I am a firm believer in Wikipedia and would never want to clog it up with a useless article. I look forward to hearing back from you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmeldem (talk • contribs) 19:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)