User talk:Wiae/Archive 14

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018
Hello ,
 * Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
 * Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.


 * If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.


 * We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.


 * With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018
Hello ,

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.
 * Reviewer of the Year
 * Thanks are also extended for their work to (15,059 reviews),  (12,760reviews),  (9,001reviews),  (8,440reviews),  (8,092reviews),   (5,306reviews),  (4,153 reviews),  (4,016reviews),  and  (3,615reviews)., , , and  have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only sevenmonths, while , with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top100 reviewers.

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.
 * Less good news, and an appeal for some help

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.
 * Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minutevideo was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Training video

User page
You're going "codeine crazy"? I wasn't sure if that was you or vandalism. Seems like an odd confessional. Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Liz, they are lyrics from a song by rapper Future. Perhaps I should remove them given that people are wondering if they’re vandalism! Nice to see you around again, by the way. /wiae /tlk  12:03, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation
Hello

Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.

We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.

Trizek (WMF), 08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation - link update
The previous message about the talk pages consultation has a broken link.

The correct link has been misinterpreted by the MassMessage tool. Please use the following link: Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Trizek (WMF), 08:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17


Hello ,


 * News
 * The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.


 * Discussions of interest
 * Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
 * db-blankdraft was merged into G13 (Discussion)
 * A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
 * There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.


 * Reminders
 * NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD  because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.


 * NPP Tools Report
 * Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
 * copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
 * The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828 Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review. Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:19, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18


Hello ,

, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
 * Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.
 * Reliable Sources for NPP

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.
 * Backlog drive coming soon


 * News
 * Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.


 * Discussions of interest
 * A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
 * There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
 * What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019


Hello ,

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important. Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR. The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever. NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so  you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations. Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for  the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging. Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway. School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * QUALITY of REVIEWING
 * Backlog
 * Move to draft
 * Notifying users
 * PERM
 * Other news

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019
Hello ,

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.
 * Backlog

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.
 * Coordinator

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for  making  the occasional  mistake while  others can learn from  their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.
 * This month's refresher course

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.
 * Deletion tags

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.
 * Paid editing


 * Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
 * Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent  enhancements to  the New Pages Feed and  features in the Curation  tool, and there are still more to  come. Due to the wealth  of information  now displayed by  ORES, reviewers are strongly  encouraged to  use the system now rather than Twinkle; it  will  also  correctly  populate the logs.
 * Not English
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
 * Tools

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts
Hello. Over at the Teahouse we're having a bit of a 'spring clean' by removing old entries from the list of Hosts that new users see. As you don't appear to have been very active there for some time, your 'host profile' has been removed from the list. But please don't let that put you off contributing again in the future - either by signing back up as a Host to assist on a regular basis, or just dropping in whenever you fancy helping out.

Thank you for your past help and support for new users at the Teahouse. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:26, 9 June 2019 (UTC) "

Have a nice vacation. One thing you will not be able to do during your vacation, or ever in your entire life, though, unless things change, is to listen to Bowie's song Black Star's last 45 seconds because iTunes cockblocked him and forced him to chop off those 45 seconds.

You said me calling them out on it was unconstructive. What do you propose? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sowff (talk • contribs) 17:40, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019
Hello ,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon. There are now holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action. Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays. Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox. Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards. Admin has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers. Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources. Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13. The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights. There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion. To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Getting the queue to 0
 * Coordinator
 * This month's refresher course
 * Tools
 * It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
 * It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
 * Reviewer Feedback
 * Second set of eyes
 * Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
 * Do be sure to have our talk page  on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
 * Arbitration Committee
 * Community Wish list

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019


This year's Reviewer of the Year is. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.
 * Reviewer of the Year

Special commendation again goes to who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to and  who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by.
 * Redirect autopatrol

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.
 * Source Guide Discussion

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * This month's refresher course

Request on 06:30:14, 12 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by DanielMaithya
Hi, Would love to know how to publish this biography: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Abdiqani_Sheikh_Omar_Hassan DanielMaithya (talk) 06:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

DanielMaithya (talk) 06:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020
Hello ,

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.
 * Source Guide Discussion

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.
 * Redirects


 * Discussions and Resources
 * There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
 * A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
 * A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
 * A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.
 * Refresher

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Metroactive (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Metroactive (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
 * disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
 * is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020
Hello ,

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference. In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.
 * Your help can make a difference
 * Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate
 * Discussions and Resources
 * A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
 * Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
 * A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
 * Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello ,



It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to and  who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to, , and who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
 * Year in review

has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
 * Reviewer of the Year

As a special recognition and thank you has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
 * NPP Technical Achievement Award

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

CCI update
--MER-C 12:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello ,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our  Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but  there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

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 or its software. Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:33, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Oxford Space Systems
Hello, Wiae. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Oxford Space Systems, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

About article
hello Wiae. thanks for your review. this is about DirectDL article. This article may be deleted. I try to understand you, the references are about the article. in some of Arabic/Persian ones, there is a passing reference to it. but all of them, about this article. please review your vote again. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E V I L044 (talk • contribs) 07:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for leaving me this message. Unfortunately Wikipedia articles that cannot be supported by reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject are typically deleted from Wikipedia. (There are some exceptions but they don't really apply in this case.) I would encourage you to review these links, as well as the article about the general notability guideline. the only references I see do not provide significant coverage (i.e., more than a passing mention) from a reliable source, so unfortunately I think the article will likely be deleted, but we will wait to see what the outcome of the deletion discussion may be. /wiae /tlk  13:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time, I fully understand what you mean, but don't expect too much for a 4-month website. for example about medium, you can see all of platform features. please change your mind to "keep". i add new refrences soon as posibble, but maybe article deleted untel that time. E V I L044 (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi again . I think the critical thing to keep in mind is that if we really shouldn't expect too much for a 4-month website because it hasn't been discussed much by reliable sources, then it is probably too soon for a Wikipedia article about that subject in the first place. Or, to put it another way, we actually should expect significant coverage of a 4-month website if Wikipedia is to contain an article about it. I hope this explains why I believe this subject doesn't yet meet Wikipedia's article inclusion standards (which I linked you to in my previous post) and why I have suggested that the article be deleted at the deletion discussion. /wiae /tlk  20:10, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Whether this article has been deleted or not, I'm glad to meet you. You have very good morals and you speak well. Unlike reviewers who do not even answer. If the article is deleted, I will recreate it with new and better references in the future. Thank you very much <3 E V I L044 (talk) 20:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, I try to be helpful. If the article is indeed deleted, I would suggest waiting until it has been written about extensively from reliable sources before attempting recreation. (If, say, TheNextWeb were to write about the site, that would be a useful source.) I wouldn't blame other reviewers; the reality is that their work—reviewing thousands of articles that typically don't meet our inclusion guidelines—is both tough and thankless work. That said, if you are looking for friendly advice, you can always reach out to the Teahouse.
 * The other thing to remember is that notability, which is basically "the criteria a subject must meet in order to get its own Wikipedia article", can be a bit confusing. It may take some time to fully wrap your head around it. My first article was also deleted (for any admin talk-page-stalkers, it was written on April 4, 2010 😊), but with lots of reading and thinking I developed a better understanding of what "notability" means and why it is so important to Wikipedia. It is not impossible, although it will certainly take some effort up-front. /wiae /tlk  20:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * To your knowledge, how much time is left to delete the article? E V I L044 (talk) 05:56, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, deletion discussions generally run for at least 7 full days (see WP:EARLY for the details) but sometimes they can run longer (especially if participation is very low), and occasionally they can end more quickly than that. /wiae /tlk  10:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

University
I came to know that you removed whole parts what i added with citation from Latest University prospectus 2022-23. I added new department of environmental science and Aeronautics that university launched. If you are not part of student of that university. You are not eligible to delete or remove without knowledge. Please restore i took time to write. Wiki1957BOY (talk) 16:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, unfortunately some of the content you added to both Jamia Millia Islamia and Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Jamia Millia Islamia had to be removed because it was copied from copyrighted sources. The vast majority of the content available online is actually covered by copyright, meaning we generally cannot include it in Wikipedia due to our copyright policy. I understand that you worked hard on this content and that it is frustrating to see it removed, but unfortunately we have no choice but to remove it in order to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policies. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is an environment where anyone can edit—it is not only students of a given university who can contribute or edit content to that school's Wikipedia article. Let me know if you have any other questions; I've also left some reading material relevant to copyright on your user talk page. Thanks, /wiae /tlk  16:09, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, it's been a while but hopefully I can make a bit of a dent in the CCI backlog! /wiae /tlk  20:51, 19 May 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)

Kalnabu
Can you explain how I'm supposed to write the page with only 2-3 sources on the battle itself and the rest on its background or the aftermath? I just started editing a short while ago and thought that I differentiated my page enough from the source. Sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeteAmora (talk • contribs) 11:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for asking here. I recognize that it can be hard to write an article when there are only a couple of sources, and it can be frustrating to see your hard work removed due to Wikipedia's copyright policy. What I would suggest is that you summarize what those sources say entirely in your own words. You can still use "brief verbatim textual excerpts from copyrighted media, properly attributed or cited to [the] original source or author" if there is a part where it's particularly important to use the wording from the source. But in general, you should write all Wikipedia content in your own words. Unfortunately, just changing a word here and there isn't enough—that's still close paraphrasing, which doesn't change things enough to prevent it from being substantially similar to the copyrighted text.
 * So that's what I'd suggest. Don't hesitate to get in touch with a WikiProject if you would like some help with the writing process—maybe WikiProject Military history would be willing to help? /wiae /tlk  11:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Yep, there were a few edit conflicts
Your suspicions were correct, an edit conflict or three did indeed occur. 😁 I had some other stuff I was doing at the time, so thanks for finishing what I clumsily tried to start. Mako001 (C) (T)  🇺🇦 13:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries! And thanks for filling in the bare refs. /wiae /tlk  13:35, 11 June 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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Wiae!


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

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 17:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

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

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 17:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! /wiae /tlk  21:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Wiae, If i copied so what it is describing about kuwait first one I will edit but second it is describing about kuwait islands. So anyway we type it come same way only. Thank u 37.231.219.93 (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello IP editor, the content you add to Wikipedia, including to Draft:Tourism in Kuwait, should always be written in your own words. /wiae /tlk  17:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm still learning how to properly edit pages. I didn't know that what I put for Caesars's Entertainment would count as potential copyright infringement. Not only that but I actually figured out that what I had put had already been included in a different Wiki page called "Harris Entertainment". With that said, thanks for the clarification and the notice. Appreciate it! 70.49.220.24 (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi IP editor! I looked at Harrah's Entertainment and I think it is suitably paraphrased from https://www.caesars.com/corporate. In general we cannot copy and paste text from online sources into Wikipedia (unless they are suitably licensed for reuse, like some of the Creative Commons licenses). Even "close paraphrasing" is still considered a copyright violation. But from a glance at the Harrah's article, I think the language used in the "History" section is sufficiently different from the Caesars link that it is okay.
 * That said, there was in fact another copyright violation in the Harrah's article, which I have addressed here. Thanks for pointing me to the article! /wiae /tlk  19:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem! BryanXIX (talk) 23:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks Dan, much appreciated and happy to jump back in to help! /wiae /tlk  11:15, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

I fixed
I fixed the draft Barytelphulsa cunicularis and it does not have any copyvio now, please remove the notice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demopan444 (talk • contribs) 12:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, the article looks good from a copyright perspective now, thanks. I have put the copyvio-revdel template back on the article because it serves as a kind of temporary flag that an administrator will need to review the article's history and possibly hide some historical revisions of the article. This shouldn't take too long so please leave it there until an administrator has had the chance to do so. Thanks, /wiae /tlk  13:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I have moved the article.. Is that okay? Demopan444 (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't know much about this topic so I'm not sure I can give you much concrete advice about the article, but on a technical level, there is nothing preventing you from doing what you did (moving the article to the main article space). A new page reviewer will be along to review the article in the coming days and they may have some more substantive comments for you. /wiae /tlk  13:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Mittal Patel
Hiya thanks for dropping Mittal Patel VSSM a line about the apparent COI on Mittal Patel. I created the page (with sourced info!) because she is a recipient of the Nari Shakti Puraskar. It's a shame they aren't responding but I suppose sometimes people find it really hard to follow the wikisystem and do things which seem obvious to us inside the system, like reply on a talk page to a message. Must be dispiriting to add stuff then have it deleted, but I'm not really sure what more to do! If you do happen to make contact, I was just checking they uploaded, I don't think they've gone about that in the right way either. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 17:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I came across the article from a copyright report at CopyPatrol (https://copypatrol.toolforge.org/en/?id=95521520) since one of the edits added some text from the VSSM website. Based on the activity and the timestamps it seems fairly clear what's going on here, although as you point out, talk and user talk pages are not always so intuitive for newcomers. If they continue to edit without communicating, I will probably mention it at WP:COIN (which is only to be used ... when ordinary talk page discussion has been attempted and failed to resolve the issue, such as when an editor has repeatedly added problematic material over an extended period.).
 * As for the pictures, at least one of them seems to come from https://www.vssmindia.org/awards-and-recognition/ which I'm pretty sure isn't CC By-SA 4.0. But I also never deal with image / file copyright issues or with Commons so I unfortunately can't point to the next step here. /wiae /tlk  17:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh gosh there's more pix! Well I suppose that'll get picked up at commons. Yes I agree if it carries on the next step will prob need to be WP:COIN. All the best, Mujinga (talk) 18:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Chris Oyakhilome's Beliefs
Hi, it is not out of order to include the beliefs of a religious man who albeit seem popular and at the same time, controversial. We have precedence of such on Wikipedia and it was not copied from where you quoted; it was sourced directly from Oyakhilome's organizations website, as should be, especially if it involves a fundamental tenet of a religious person. If you checked the reference before deleting, you would have seen it.

To obliterate that whole section is out of order dear editor. If it requires further work, maybe you state, and also, if you may, do a bit more research on some other religious leaders such as Benny Hinn, TD Jakes, or even other sects, they have their pages with their beliefs. I would await your feedback before Pshegs (talk) 12:39, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, we cannot copy and paste text from most websites into Wikipedia, as this runs afoul of our copyright policy. Even if the content was copied from https://www.pastorchrisonline.org (and not from https://unstoppablearmy.org/our-belief/, as I had mentioned in my edit summary), you'll see "© COPYRIGHT 2023 pastorchrisonline.org" at the bottom of that page. This means the text is protected by copyright and cannot be included wholesale in the article.
 * If you want to rephrase the work in your own words then that is one potential solution here. However, be careful about using self-published sources; to quote from that Wikipedia policy, self-published material such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites... are largely not acceptable as sources. (Emphasis mine.) On Wikipedia we aim to describe what the reliable sources have said about a topic, not what subjects say about themselves.
 * I noticed you said you've found other articles with content similar to what I removed. The sad reality is that many Wikipedia articles are not always up to snuff, and so it can be risky to compare an article to others as a basis for including content. It's far better to use Wikipedia's policies and guidelines as the yardstick.
 * I'll leave some information about copyright on your user talk page. Thanks, /wiae /tlk  12:54, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft CVs
Figures that the morning I have some free time and plan on banging through the backlog, you've gone through and sorted most of them! Primefac (talk) 11:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I left all the really hard ones for you :) /wiae /tlk  11:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Future Africa Leaders Award
Hello, I think it's bad practice to obliterate information from Wikipedia instead of contributing positively to sourcing for alternative sources and filling it up. You deface articles and I don't think it's right.

I saw your edits there and they are not okay. First, if you feel the source of information is not valid enough, get another. These are things that did not happen in the dark; they are all over. Africa sure does not have the level of news coverage the west has, so if you embark on a mission to delete important African information and heritage from Wikipedia, be sure to find other sources and fill them up. Pshegs (talk) 21:21, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , on the contrary, your edits introduced copyrighted content into Future Africa Leaders Award in a way that violated Wikipedia's copyright policy. This has nothing to do with "not valid enough" sourcing, it's about following Wikipedia's policies. You need to read these—I have already linked them to you on your talk page.
 * Finally, as a point of order, it's considered bad practice to insult others on Wikipedia with accusations of "defacing articles", and especially when they are in fact doing nothing of the sort. /wiae /tlk  21:38, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Friend, you left a section without content but a reference under the star prize winners. Kindly go and check it and revert. Thank you. Pshegs (talk) 00:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to do that, because as I explained, the content contained copyrighted content. And the offending revisions have since been hidden from the edit history, so in any event there's no way to revert to a version containing that text. If you'd like to insert content that complies with Wikipedia's copyright policy and our other core policies and guidelines, then go for it. /wiae /tlk  09:42, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No need to respond further than I already have. My response to this is already in my previous responses.
 * Thank you and well done. Pshegs (talk) 05:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * While we're on the subject, what's your connection to Chris Oyakhilome? /wiae /tlk  16:41, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)