User talk:VQuakr/Archives/2022

MOS lead comment
VQuakr, I'm posting this to your talk page and 's since appears unwilling to discuss the issue on their own talk page. All three of us have asked that Soibangla be more contentious about adding content to article bodies first and then adding the content to the lead when reasonable. . Previously Soibangla has had issues with good citation practices in their edits (something they did improve). I understand Soibangla has had issues with my criticism of some of their edits but I think we can all agree that following the MOS shouldn't be controversial. Is there a good, non-confrontational way to fix this? Springee (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * no, there's no good non-confrontational way to fix it if they're not interested in voluntarily improving. Soibangla seems to think it's reasonable for them to assume that editors should follow them around, sweeping up the messes they create without ever improving, and they are clearly not interested in being civil. So either they get what they want and we quietly sweep up after them forever (not a good option), or community action is pursued to force them to do better (not a non-confrontational option). VQuakr (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Your characterization of me is grossly incorrect. soibangla (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , I think the real concern here is that you are a very prolific editor and often in controversial topic areas. Unfortunately your edits often, in the view of other editors, violate MOS:LEAD.  Do you think it is reasonable to add content to the lead if the material isn't in the article body?  The edit from earlier today was certainly good content but it should have been added to the body and summarized in the lead.  A while back  commented about your citation practices.  You acted in good faith and fixed the issue.  Please do the same here.  Springee (talk) 17:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm basing it solely on your behavior in November and last month. It's a characterization of your actions, and your actions unfortunately indicate a need for improvement to be forced on you. Everyone: I'm not really interested in hashing this out on my talk page; I don't think it's the ideal venue. I think they've answered your question for you here. VQuakr (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Despite my effort to defuse a conflict with you, you deleted that and now say my actions indicate a need for improvement to be forced on you. Fascinating. soibangla (talk) 18:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , I will respect VQuakr's request and this is my last post here. Please take this as constructive feedback and make sure new content is in the body before/at the same time as adding it to the lead.  Springee (talk) 18:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * as I noted in the edit summary, you said you weren't willing to discuss further. Hence the removal. Now, you're discussing further. The only way you are going to "defuse conflict" is by changing your editing habits to align with our policies and guidelines. VQuakr (talk) 19:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I said I wouldn't discuss it further, not that I wouldn't read any response, and I'm discussing it here only because you removed it. I took notice of the feedback I received and as always I will endeavor to improve, but I find the intimation of seeking sanctions for the Wikipedia equivalent of occasional parking tickets to be excessive. Should I expect an ANI/AE notification from you? soibangla (talk) 19:27, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh good lord. So you wouldn't have responded if I replied, but you will respond if I remove the post? That's nonsensical. Communication is two-way; if you say you're not going to discuss then you're wasting both of our time by posting to my talk page. Sanctions are the solution to disruptive editing when direct communication is ineffective, as it has been so far with you. That doesn't make us mean and it doesn't make you a victim (even though you seem very eager to paint yourself as one); it's a direct result of your own behavior. Similarly, you and only you control whether this has to be escalated in order to get the disruption to stop. So only you know the answer to your final question. VQuakr (talk) 19:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

You're Invited! Writing Black History of the Pacific Northwest into Wikipedia
On, Friday, February 25, 2022, Oregon State University will be hosting an online editathon focused on Black history of the Pacific Northwest. You can learn more here and/or register here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Portland Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon: March 12, 2022
You are invited! An Art+Feminism Wikipedia edit-a-thon will be held in Portland, Oregon, on March 12, 2022. Learn more here!

Wikipedia is one of the most-visited sites on the internet—and it’s created by people who volunteer their time to write and edit pages. Learn how to edit Wikipedia and be a part of shaping our understanding of our world. In this workshop, volunteer Wikipedia editors will be on hand to train participants on how to get started editing pages and offer ideas for which pages you can pitch in to help improve. Show up at any point during the four hours to get started!

Also: Free burritos!! We will be providing vegan, vegetarian, and meat burritos from food cart Loncheria Las Mayos. Alder Commons has a large, fenced playground. Children are welcome! Some computers will be available to borrow, but if you have a laptop, please bring it to use. We will also be leading an online training for new editors at 11am-12pm PST. Please feel free to join that training if you are not able to show up IRL.

This event is part of the international month of events organized by Art+Feminism, which is building a community of activists committed to closing information gaps related to gender, feminism, and the arts, beginning with Wikipedia. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

"October(poem)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect October(poem) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 6 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:10, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello ,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently Special:ListUsers/patroller New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing newsletter 2022 – #1
Read this in another language • Subscription list for the multilingual newsletter • Local subscription list



The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at most WMF-hosted wikis. You can join the discussion about this tool for the English Wikipedia is at Village pump (proposals). You will be able to turn it off in the tool or at Special:Preferences.

The Editing team plans to change the appearance of talk pages. These are separate from the changes made by the Desktop improvements project and will appear in both Vector 2010 and Vector 2022. The goal is to add some information and make discussions look visibly different from encyclopedia articles. You can see some ideas at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

23:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

A certain editor at Talk:Thomas Jefferson
I've seen that you've had extended interactions with a certain editor at Thomas Jefferson's talk page. I'm at my wits end with them right now, and I wondering if you had any advice for dealing with them. If anything, though, I just wanted to commiserate and know that I'm not alone in my current level of annoyance. Have a good one. Anwegmann (talk) 02:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * publicly complaining about an almost-named editor isn't going to end well for anyone. Just remember this is an internet encyclopedia and will still be here if you need to step away for a couple of days to unwind. VQuakr (talk) 16:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello ,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000 at the end of May.
 * Backlog status

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
 * Backlog drive

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
 * TIP – New school articles

There is a new template available,, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
 * Misc

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
 * Notes

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

WP:BLPN post
Hi VQuakr, I don't know yet if I'd do anything about it but I'd be grateful to know if you became aware of recent situations regarding the Depp v. Heard article due to this post at WP:BLPN. Perhaps to provide balance of other thing said, I'm extremely proud of my contributions to that and related articles which I think largely stand on their own merits. Many thanks, GregKaye 08:17, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022
Hello ,

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators and, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.
 * Backlog status

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.


 * Coordination: and  have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out.  will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.


 * Open letter to the WMF: The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.


 * TIP - Reviewing by subject: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.


 * New reviewers: The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.


 * Reminders
 * Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
 * If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing on their talk page.
 * If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
 * To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message
Hi ,

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.
 * Invitation

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing news 2022 #2
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter



The new [] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF)) 00:36, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
(t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Requested move of Sorbonne
An editor has requested for Sorbonne to be moved to Sorbonne (building). Since you had some involvement with Sorbonne, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). -- Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 14:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Check the talk page on mintpress
Regarding recent edits in it Bobisland (talk) 22:21, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Electronic Harassment and William Binney
Hello VQuakr,

I recently added the fact that William Binney declares himself to be a target of these attacks.

"Ex NSA Technical Director and whistleblower William Binney affirms to have become a victim and is currently working with his wife (physicist Katherine Horton, also a victim) on gathering evidence on the practice. "

This fact is:

a) Certainly true, as you can see his statement on the referenced video

b) Certainly relevant to the subject, as he is probably the highest profile case ever to go on record.

And you removed it. Why did you do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galmeida28 (talk • contribs)


 * see WP:PRIMARY. To consider including coverage of this we would need at least one reliable secondary source. The subject's claims from a zoom video convey zero weight. VQuakr (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * That would be the case if I had written he *is* a victim, but I've written he *affirms* to be a victim. And this affimation falls on the third case of the link WP:PRIMARY you've put: "A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." Any educated person with access to the video can confirm he stated he is a victim.Galmeida28 (talk) 17:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No. is correct. —  Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 17:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Why? Why my argument is not valid? Galmeida28 (talk) 18:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * see WP:WEIGHT. Content discussions should be had at the article talk page at Talk:Electronic harassment not here, but this is quite straightforward. We're an encyclopedia; we don't source content to Youtube. VQuakr (talk) 18:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thats right. — Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 17:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
 —Alalch E. is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. —Alalch E. 18:29, 25 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for making repairs to the Twitter suspensions article. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 04:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, VQuakr!


Happy New Year! VQuakr, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 22:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 22:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)