Jump to content

User talk:Cassiopeia/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18→Archive 20

Re: Curaçao Baseball League moved to draftspace

Hello there, thank you for your message (Re: Curaçao Baseball League moved to draftspace).

That's fair enough. Much of the information came through the league's Facebook page so I'm currently finding alternative sources now so I can choose the right pieces to use as citations. That may take some time because I don't speak Papiamento and it's a very difficult language to translate. Once I've done that and added the citations, would you be content for me to move it back into main space and have it verified? RallyXEditor (talk) 11:05, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

RallyXEditor Greetings to you. The draft will stay in the system for 6 months, so take your time to find the sources. Pls note at least 3 independent, reliable sources are needed where by the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not merely passing mentioned such as sources from major newspapers. Please also read WP:Your First Article and referencing to familiar yourself on the requirements and how to provide inline citations. (check out the message title on top of my talk page "I'd like your help" for further info which is not state here.) Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:20, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-05

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Problems

  • When someone moves a page to a name that already exists that page that had the name the article is moved to is deleted. For a couple of months this didn't always work. Some users saw an error message instead. This has now been fixed. [1]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals update #027, 28 Jan 2019

Portal styles

For a visually intensive portal, see Portal:Hummingbirds.

If you find any other portals that stand out, please send me the links so I can include them in the next issue. Thank you.

Conversion continues

There are about 1100 portals left in the old style, with subpages and static excerpts. As those are very labor intensive to maintain (because their maintenance is manual), all those except the ones with active maintainers (about 100) are slated for upgrade = approximately 1000. We started with 1500, and so over a quarter of them have been processed so far. That's good, but at this rate, conversion will take another 3 years. So, some automation (AWB?) is in order. We just need to keep at it, and push down on the gas pedal a bit harder.

You can find the old-style portals with an insource search of "box portal skeleton".

Flagship portals: the portals on the Main Page

Speaking of upgrades...

The following portals are listed in the header at the top of Wikipedia's Main Page, and get far more traffic than all other portals:

  1. Portal:Arts
  2. Portal:Biography
  3. Portal:Geography
  4. Portal:History
  5. Portal:Mathematics
  6. Portal:Science
  7. Portal:Society
  8. Portal:Technology

Of those, all but one have been revamped to an automated self-updating single-page design.

The remaining one, Portal:Mathematics has manual maintainers, and has been partially upgraded.

As these are our flagship fleet, they need to be kept in top-notch condition.

Check 'em out, and improve them if you can.

And be sure they are on your watchlist.

New portals since last issue

Keep 'em coming!

Deorphanizing the new portals

As you know, thousands of the new portals are orphans, that is, having no links to them from article space. For all practical purposes, that means they are not part of the encyclopedia yet, and readers will be unlikely to find them.

What is needed are links to these portals from the See also sections of the corresponding root articles.

Dreamy Jazz to the rescue...

Dreamy Jazz has created a bot to place the corresponding category link to the end of each portal (if it is missing), and place a link to each portal in the See also section of the corresponding root articles.

That bot, named User:Dreamy Jazz Bot, is currently in its trial period performing the above described edits!

To take a look at the edits it has made so far, see Special:Contributions/Dreamy_Jazz_Bot.

It shouldn't be long before the bot is processing the entire set of new portals.

Good news indeed.

Way to go, Dreamy Jazz!

And, that's a wrap

That's all I have to report this time around.

No doubt there will be more to tell soon.

Until then,    — The Transhumanist   13:10, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

The Times

Hi, I noticed your recent RX request for a couple of old articles from The Times. I have free online access to that (and The Guardian) up to about 2003, courtesy of Manchester Libraries. Feel free to ping me if you need something quick in future. - Sitush (talk) 12:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Sitush Greetings. Very kind of you to offer such assistance. Thank you. I request articles from RX usually is for my review work for AfC and NPP. Will contact you next time when i need to get hold some article from Times and Guardian. cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 19:01, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

An association for Mesopedians

Hi greetings, I created an Wikipedian association named m:Association of Mesopedianist Wikipedians for mesopedians. Would you mind joining in it? Regards.--PATH SLOPU (Talk) 14:16, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Path slopu Thanks for informing. Joined. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:49, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for helping me improve my editing skills on Wikipedia by commenting extensively on my articles, giving useful links and tips, and moving them around as necessary, as well as trusting me to improve. I note you've done so to tens if not hundreds of beginners in a civil way. When I grow up I want to be a dedicated Wikipedia editor like you. ObongiFrank (talk) 17:15, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft page - Draft:Lee Yeol-eum

There are no sources. I can't find them! It's hard! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CuteDolphin712 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

CuteDolphin712, Greetings to you. I believe you were referring to your Draft:Lee Yeol-eum. Sources can be in any languages and if you cant find the sources, that means the subject is not notable enough to merit a page in Wikipedia. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:14, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
What are the sources for that draft page? Show me some if you got. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CuteDolphin712 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi CuteDolphin712, First of all you dont need to create another new title message (new section) for the same topics, you just need to click on the message title " Draft page - Draft:Lee Yeol-eum " and continue writing. Do read the green box on the right when you before you start writing for there are 3 info for you on communicating with other editor such as sign you post and indentation before you start your message.
I suggest you to read WP:Your First Article and Referencing for beginners to familiar yourself on what is needed, how to write an article and provide inline citation. Article needs to have at least 3 independent, reliable sources (click on the blue highlighted texts for further details) where by the source talk about the subject in length and in depth and not only passing mentioned. Sources such as from major newspapers and in any languages could be used. Homepage, facebook, IMBD, sources associate with the subject, user generated sites, press releases, interviews, marketing pieces associate with the subject and etc are considered NOT independent and / or not reliable and canot be use to demonstrate the notabilit of the subject. Where do you get the info for your content? That would be your source. Also, pls read the Wikipedia notability requirements for actor/actress and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 19:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Error: It's "cannot" not "can not". No need to space as normal.

Draft:Auguste Groner

Yeah, there are no references. I brought it in from the German WP, and there are no in-line citations there, just some links to German language material in references. She is, however, a Gutenberg author, and I've waited a couple of years for someone else to make this article, which never happened. Is it because she is a woman? Well, I think so (just try to find an article on a 19th century Gutenberg cookbook author). I would ask that you not stand in the way, and let this get out there where someone else might work on it. It is already better than most stubs. Anthon.Eff (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Anthon.Eff Good day. Thank you for the question and request above. See below comments.
  1. The article was moved to draft space is not because she was a woman but as state in your talk page, that to merit a page in English Wikipedia the subject needs to be notable and the content claimed need to to supported by significant coverage (at least 3) indepedent, reliable sources where by the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not only passing mentioned. Sources such as from major newspapers and books would suffice.
  2. Each Wikipedia sister site (different languages) operate independently from each other and have their own guidelines and policies. In English (EN) Wikipedia EN, to merit a page in EN Wikipedia not only the subject needs to be deemed notable but also to pass criteria one above.
  3. It is the burden of the editor who added/created/change the content of the page to provide sources - see WP:PROVEIT and WP:BURDEN.
  4. The content is a copied in translation of the German (DE) Wikipedia - see here [2] and you seem not the original editor in DE Wikipedia , for such proper attribution is required to pay to the original editors in DE Wikipedia. - pls see WP:PATT. You could do a dummy edit to state that in the edit summary. I have added the wiki link in the article talk page and translation needed in the article page. Please write the content in your own words.
Pls read WP:Your First Article, referencing and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for further information. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Alright. Will take some time. Thanks for the response. Anthon.Eff (talk) 12:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Anthon.Eff Take your time, the draft will be in the system for next 6 months before it is deleted. By the way, sources would be in any languages. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:39, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

List of Jesuits

Dear Cassiopeia,
You recently moved my List of former Jesuits to the draft space with the argument that "does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia)". Fair enough, I'm working on providing those sources and citations right now; I've got 5 referenced already (Draft:List of former Jesuits). But what about the List of Jesuits? That only has 3 references, all the other persons on the list are completely unsourced (I added a refimprove template for that). Note that some of these people are still alive and thus fall under WP:BLP policies. If 3 is enough for such a long list, my shorter list with 5 references should be acceptable by now, or the List of Jesuits should be unpublished. What do you think should be done? Greetings, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:34, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Nederlandse Leeuw Good day. You could click the "submit your draft page for review" button atop of the Draft:List of former Jesuits and I will review for you and get it published. (Let me know once you have done that) Since there list subjects all have articles in Wikipedia, it is easy find sources and kindly provide as many as possible. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals update #028, 04 Feb 2019

Here's a quicky status report:

Old-style portals: 1,018
Single-page portals: 4,367
Total portals: 5,385

But of course, there has been more going on than just that...

Dreamy Jazz Bot is up and running!

Dreamy Jazz Bot has been approved and is now up and running.

What it does is places missing links to orphaned portals. It places a link in the See also section of the corresponding root article, and it puts one at the top of the corresponding category page.

We have thousands of new portals that have yet to be added to the encyclopedia proper, just waiting to go live.

When they do go live, over the coming days or weeks, due to Dreamy Jazz Bot, it will be like an explosion of new portals on the scene. We should expect an increase in awareness and interest in the portals project. Perhaps even new participants.

Get ready...

Get set...

Go!

Another sockpuppet infiltrator has been discovered

User:Emoteplump, a recent contributor to the portals project, was discovered to be a sockpuppet account of an indefinitely blocked user.

When that happens, admins endeavor to eradicate everything the editor contributed. This aftermath has left a wake of destruction throughout the portals department, again.

The following portals which have been speedy deleted, are in the process of being re-created. Please feel free to help to turn these blue again:

And the corresponding talk pages:

New portals since the last issue

Keep up the great work

Until next time,    — The Transhumanist   08:59, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-06

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • It was easy to untick a box by accident in Special:Preferences. This will now be fixed. [3]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 February. It will be on all wikis from 7 February (calendar).

Meetings

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Citing

Dear C, how do I site? I can site it, I have two sources plus I saw it happen myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jammingwithedwardlegge (talk • contribs) 04:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jammingwithedwardlegge Greetings to you and thank you for the question. Pls go to referencing for beginners for info and instruction on how to provide inline citations in the body texts. I have also sent you a welcome message, pls click the blue highlighted texts for more info. Do pop back here if you need further assistance. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:56, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

CVUA

Hi Cassiopeia, I was just leaving a note on Mz7's talk page, and saw your comment about you intention to become a CVUA trainer. Just to let you know, I'd advise you to do it. I've taken on three students in the last few of weeks (I only intended to take on one initially, but didn't want to disappoint them when they asked...). I'm enjoying the interaction, and learning new things as I go along - having to explain stuff to someone else is always a great way to identify any uncertainties in your own thinking, and going back to areas I haven't touched on in a while is refreshing. Plus it's enjoyable interacting with them. Anyway, thought I'd just drop you a line to say go for it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 19:11, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Girth Summit Good day. Thank you for you message. We both went through the CVUA training under the guidance of Mz7, who is extremely patient, kind and knowledgeable, for who I learnt so much from. I share your thoughts above and I believe in knowledge sharing and give back (I have time at the moment, taking a long hiatus from my corporate working life in an APAC managerial position - just like you before busy with business trips, working 12 hrs daily :)). I will sign up and thanks again for the note above as it is nice to receive message of encouragement in such civility. cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:34, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Declined article Draft:Ross Kolby

Hi Cassiopeia,

I am currently writing an article about the Norwegian artist Ross Kolby, which you declined.

I have tried to insert as many links to both Norwegian and British sourses/sites to verify my text/claims as much possible.

Is this not enough? How may I improve this article to get it accepted?

Thank you for any advice.

Best,

Constituto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constituto (talk • contribs) 08:21, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Constituto Good day and thank you for the questions above. Pls see the comments below
  1. Notability - First of all subject needs to notability in order to merit a page in Wikipedia - pls see WP:ARTIST requirements.
  2. Independent, reliable source - content claimed needs to support by significant coverage (at least 3) independent, reliable sources for verification which the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not only passing mentioned. Sources such as from books, major newspapers and reputable journals would suffice. Sources CAN be in any languages. Home page, sources associated with the subject (like where he exhibited his work, friends , marketing agent and etc (examples as This 2 and this 2] and etc), user generated sites, press releases and etc are considered NOT reliable and / or not independent for such it can NOT be used to contribute to the notability of the subject.
  3. External links - pls remove all external links in the body text.
  4. Inline citations (sources) - Pls read referencing for beginners for info and on instruction on how to provide inline citation (sources) of the content claimed.
  5. Importance/significant work only - pls only include works that are important/significant only in the content as this is an article and not a resume.
  6. Your First Article - Pls read WP:Your First Article to familiar yourself on how to write an article. In addition - check out Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything
Once you have rework as per above, you can resubmit for review. Pop back here if you need further assistance. Happy editing and cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

re shipwrecks of saint malo

Hi There Cassiopeia this is the editor of shipwrecks of st malo here, thanks for bringing those broken links to my attention. I've re-added them so that they should now work ok. I'm not sure what happened as the actual address was accurate, the only thing i can think of that might be why is a mix up between redirection to the french or english version of the pages. It seems to be working on my computer now though, would you please let me know if the problem continues? Thanks!

Archeonationale Archeonationale (talk) 09:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Archeonationale Hi, thank you for re-added the sources. Reviewed and accepted. Thank you for your contribution and happy editing. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:11, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Message for you HERE

--Wyn.junior (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Request on 02:45:40, 11 February 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by 68.103.78.155


I Need Some Help with the 2019 Conference USA football Article. 68.103.78.155 (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

68.103.78.155 (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

68.103.78.155, Hi I have left comment on the draft page. Have a read. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-07

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can use the ambox CSS class to show page issues to mobile readers. When you use ambox there are classes you can use.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 February. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 February. It will be on all wikis from 14 February (calendar).

Meetings

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals update #029, 13 Feb 2019

Where we are at:

Single-page portals: 4,704
Total portals: 5,705

The Ref desks survived the proposal to shut them down

You might be familiar with the Ref desks, by their link on every new portal. They are a place you can go to ask volunteers almost any knowledge-related question, and have been a feature of Wikipedia since August of 2005 (or perhaps earlier). They were linked to from portals in an effort to improve their visibility, and to provide a bridge from the encyclopedia proper to project space (the Wikipedia community).

Well, somebody proposed that we get rid of them, and the community decided that that was not going to happen. Thank you for defending the Ref desks!

Here's a link to the dramatic discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Indefinitely_semiprotecting_the_refdesk#Proposal_II:_Shut_down_the_Ref_Desks

The cleanup after sockpuppet Emoteplump continues...

The wake of disruption left by Emoteplump and the admins who reverted many (but not all) of his/her edits is still undergoing cleanup. We could use all the help we can get on this task...

Almost all of the speedy deleted portals have been rebuilt from scratch.

For the portals he/she restarted (many of which were done mistakenly, overwriting restarts and further development that had already been done), and/or tagged as the maintainer, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Emoteplump&oldid=881568794#Additional_Portals_under_my_watch

10,000 portals, here we come...

We're at 5,705 portals and counting.

New portals since issue #28

  1. Portal:Abitibi-Témiscamingue
  2. Portal:Ahold Delhaize
  3. Portal:AKB48
  4. Portal:Åland Islands
  5. Portal:Alaska Airlines
  6. Portal:Albanian Civil War
  7. Portal:Albertsons
  8. Portal:Alevism
  9. Portal:All in the Family
  10. Portal:Alternative metal
  11. Portal:Ambient music
  12. Portal:Ancient Near East mythology
  13. Portal:Ancient Roman religion
  14. Portal:Andrew Cuomo
  15. Portal:Anti-consumerism
  16. Portal:Antimatter
  17. Portal:Arameans
  18. Portal:Arianism
  19. Portal:Australian Crawl
  20. Portal:Bali
  21. Portal:Banten
  22. Portal:Bengkulu
  23. Portal:Black Lives Matter
  24. Portal:Bluegrass music
  25. Portal:Bonnie Tyler
  26. Portal:Breakbeat
  27. Portal:Calypso music
  28. Portal:Cambridgeshire
  29. Portal:Camila Cabello
  30. Portal:Capcom
  31. Portal:Capsicum
  32. Portal:Celtic music
  33. Portal:Central American music
  34. Portal:Central Java
  35. Portal:Central Kalimantan
  36. Portal:Central Sulawesi
  37. Portal:Chanel
  38. Portal:Cinema of Australia
  39. Portal:Cognitive psychology
  40. Portal:Communication studies
  41. Portal:Conservatism in the United States
  42. Portal:Cortina d'Ampezzo
  43. Portal:Cross-Strait relations
  44. Portal:Cryptozoology
  45. Portal:Danish folk music
  46. Portal:Disco
  47. Portal:Dyslexia
  48. Portal:East Java
  49. Portal:East Kalimantan
  50. Portal:East Nusa Tenggara
  51. Portal:Easy listening
  52. Portal:Ed Sheeran
  53. Portal:Ehime
  54. Portal:Electricity
  55. Portal:Electronica
  56. Portal:Electronic rock
  57. Portal:English folk music
  58. Portal:Environmental technology
  59. Portal:Experimental music
  60. Portal:Extreme metal
  61. Portal:Fall Out Boy
  62. Portal:Finnish Defence Forces
  63. Portal:Finnish folk music
  64. Portal:Football in Croatia
  65. Portal:Football in Jordan
  66. Portal:Funk
  67. Portal:Gamelan
  68. Portal:General Mills
  69. Portal:Germanic languages
  70. Portal:German language
  71. Portal:Government of Canada
  72. Portal:Government of Hong Kong
  73. Portal:Government of Indonesia
  74. Portal:Government of Ireland
  75. Portal:Government of Malaysia
  76. Portal:Government of Russia
  77. Portal:Government of Singapore
  78. Portal:Government of Spain
  79. Portal:Government of Thailand
  80. Portal:Grapes
  81. Portal:Green Party of the United States
  82. Portal:Grinspoon
  83. Portal:Gwen Stefani
  84. Portal:Hardcore punk
  85. Portal:Hardcore techno
  86. Portal:Haskell (programming language)
  87. Portal:History of art
  88. Portal:History of North America
  89. Portal:History of Thailand
  90. Portal:Hollywood
  91. Portal:Hotels
  92. Portal:House music
  93. Portal:Hungarian folk music
  94. Portal:Hunters & Collectors
  95. Portal:Hydrogen
  96. Portal:Icelandic folk music
  97. Portal:Indigenous music of North America
  98. Portal:Insomniac Games
  99. Portal:International field hockey
  100. Portal:International trade
  101. Portal:Iranian music
  102. Portal:Islamophobia
  103. Portal:Jambi
  104. Portal:Jet engines
  105. Portal:Jordin Sparks
  106. Portal:Julius Caesar
  107. Portal:Kannur
  108. Portal:Kansas City Spurs
  109. Portal:Kelly Rowland
  110. Portal:Kirby
  111. Portal:Kraft Heinz
  112. Portal:Krasnoyarsk Krai
  113. Portal:Kroger
  114. Portal:Kuala Lumpur
  115. Portal:Lampung
  116. Portal:Larry Kramer
  117. Portal:LeBron James
  118. Portal:Lehigh Valley
  119. Portal:Leicestershire
  120. Portal:Liège
  121. Portal:Liguria
  122. Portal:Los Angeles Aztecs
  123. Portal:Los Angeles Wolves
  124. Portal:Macedonian language
  125. Portal:Magnetism
  126. Portal:Maithripala Sirisena
  127. Portal:Maluku (province)
  128. Portal:Mangoes
  129. Portal:Marco Pierre White
  130. Portal:McLaren
  131. Portal:Menstrual cycle
  132. Portal:Metalcore
  133. Portal:Miami FC
  134. Portal:Microblogging
  135. Portal:Microtonal music
  136. Portal:Midnight Oil
  137. Portal:Minnesota Kicks
  138. Portal:Mission: Impossible
  139. Portal:Modernism (music)
  140. Portal:Moheener Ghoraguli
  141. Portal:Mondelez International
  142. Portal:Music genres
  143. Portal:Music of Bangladesh
  144. Portal:Music of India
  145. Portal:Music of Italy
  146. Portal:Music of Japan
  147. Portal:Music of Korea
  148. Portal:Music of Latin America
  149. Portal:Music of Micronesia
  150. Portal:Music of North Africa
  151. Portal:Music of Pakistan
  152. Portal:Music of Serbia
  153. Portal:Music of the Philippines
  154. Portal:Music of the United States
  155. Portal:Mutations
  156. Portal:National Rugby League
  157. Portal:Neoclassicism (music)
  158. Portal:Netball
  159. Portal:New York City Fire Department
  160. Portal:Nick Jr.
  161. Portal:Nobility
  162. Portal:Nordic countries
  163. Portal:North Africa
  164. Portal:North Kalimantan
  165. Portal:North Maluku
  166. Portal:North Pole
  167. Portal:North Queensland
  168. Portal:North Sulawesi
  169. Portal:North Sumatra
  170. Portal:Norwegian folk music
  171. Portal:Papua (province)
  172. Portal:Peaches
  173. Portal:Politics of Abkhazia
  174. Portal:Politics of Afghanistan
  175. Portal:Politics of Albania
  176. Portal:Politics of Algeria
  177. Portal:Politics of Andorra
  178. Portal:Politics of Angola
  179. Portal:Politics of Antigua and Barbuda
  180. Portal:Politics of Argentina
  181. Portal:Politics of Artsakh
  182. Portal:Politics of Bahrain
  183. Portal:Politics of Bangladesh
  184. Portal:Politics of Bavaria
  185. Portal:Politics of Belarus
  186. Portal:Politics of Belgium
  187. Portal:Politics of Belize
  188. Portal:Politics of Benin
  189. Portal:Politics of Bhutan
  190. Portal:Politics of Bosnia and Herzegovina
  191. Portal:Politics of Botswana
  192. Portal:Politics of Brazil
  193. Portal:Politics of Brunei
  194. Portal:Politics of Bulgaria
  195. Portal:Politics of Burkina Faso
  196. Portal:Politics of Burundi
  197. Portal:Politics of Cambodia
  198. Portal:Politics of Cameroon
  199. Portal:Politics of China
  200. Portal:Politics of São Tomé and Príncipe
  201. Portal:Politics of South Sudan
  202. Portal:Politics of Sudan
  203. Portal:Politics of Tanzania
  204. Portal:Politics of the Republic of the Congo
  205. Portal:Politics of Togo
  206. Portal:Politics of Tunisia
  207. Portal:Politics of Uganda
  208. Portal:Pop rock
  209. Portal:Rap rock
  210. Portal:Ras Al Khaimah
  211. Portal:Riau
  212. Portal:Riau Islands
  213. Portal:Ricky Martin
  214. Portal:Royal Canadian Air Force
  215. Portal:Rutland
  216. Portal:Saxophones
  217. Portal:Semiotics
  218. Portal:Ska
  219. Portal:Soca music
  220. Portal:Soul music
  221. Portal:Sound sculptures
  222. Portal:Southeast Sulawesi
  223. Portal:South Kalimantan
  224. Portal:South Sulawesi
  225. Portal:South Sumatra
  226. Portal:Space: 1999
  227. Portal:Special Region of Yogyakarta
  228. Portal:Swedish folk music
  229. Portal:Tamil language
  230. Portal:Techno
  231. Portal:Terry Brooks
  232. Portal:The Living End
  233. Portal:Thrissur
  234. Portal:Trance music
  235. Portal:Tyrant flycatchers
  236. Portal:Veterinary medicine
  237. Portal:Wayanad
  238. Portal:Welsh folk music
  239. Portal:West Champaran district
  240. Portal:Western dress codes
  241. Portal:West Flanders
  242. Portal:West Java
  243. Portal:West Kalimantan
  244. Portal:West Nusa Tenggara
  245. Portal:West Papua (province)
  246. Portal:West Sulawesi
  247. Portal:West Sumatra
  248. Portal:Wildlife of India
  249. Portal:Wildlife of Nepal
  250. Portal:Windows 10
  251. Portal:Winter War
  252. Portal:Woodpeckers
  253. Portal:Worcestershire
  254. Portal:World economy
  255. Portal:World Ocean
  256. Portal:World Rally Championship
  257. Portal:World views
  258. Portal:XTC
  259. Portal:Yahoo!
  260. Portal:Yoruba people
  261. Portal:You Am I
  262. Portal:Young Wizards
  263. Portal:Yugoslavs

Prior to 2018, for the previous 14 years, portal creation was at about 80 portals per year on average. We did over 3 times that in just the past 9 days. At this rate, we'll hit the 10,000 portal mark in 5 months. But, I'm sure we can do it sooner than that.

What's next for portal pages?

There are 5 drives for portal development:

  1. Create new portals
  2. Expand existing portals, such as with new sections like Recognized content
  3. Convert or restart old-style portals into automated single-page portals
  4. Link to new portals from the encyclopedia
  5. Pageless portals

Let's take a closer look at these...

1: Creating new portals

Portal creation, for subjects that happen to have the necessary support structures already in place, is down to about a minute per portal. The creation part, which is automated, takes about 10 seconds. The other 50 seconds is taken up by manual activities, such as finding candidate subjects, inspecting generated portals, and selecting the portal creation template to be used according to the resources available. Tools are under development to automate these activities as much as possible, to pare portal creation time down even more. Ten seconds each is the goal.

Eventually, we are going to run out of navigation templates to base portals off of. Though there are still thousands to go. But, when they do run out, we'll need an easy way to create more. A nav footer creation script.

Meanwhile, other resources are being explored and developed, such as categories, and methods to harvest the links they contain.

2: Expanding existing portals

The portal collection is growing, not only by the addition of new portals, but by further developing the ones we already have, by...

  • Improving and/or adding search parameters to better power the Did you know and In the news sections.
  • Adding more selected content sections, like Selected biographies.
  • Adding and maintaining Recognized content sections, via JL-Bot.
  • Adding pictures to the image slideshow.
  • Adding panoramic pics.
  • Categorizing portals.

More features will be added as we dream them up and design them. So, don't be shy, make a wish.

3: Converting old portals

By far the hardest and most time-consuming task we have been working on is updating the old portals, the very reason we revamped this WikiProject in the first place.

There are two approaches here:

A) Restart a portal from scratch, using our automated tools. For basic no-frills portals, that works find. But, for more elaborate portals, as that tends to lose content and features, the following approach is being tried...
B) Upgrade a portal section by section, so little to nothing is lost in the process.

4: Linking to new portals

Or "portal deorphanization"...

Dreamy Jazz Bot is purring along.

And a tool in the form of a script is under development for linking to portals at the time they are created, or shortly thereafter.

5...

See below...

New WikiProject for the post-saved-portal phase of operations...

Saved portals, are portals with a saved page.

What is the next stage in the evolutionary progression?

Quantum portals.

What are quantum portals?

Portals that come into existence when you click on the portal button, and which disappear when you leave the page.

Or, as Pbsouthwood put it:

...portals that exist only as a probability function (algorithm) until you collapse the wave form by observing through the portal button (run the script), and disappear again after use...

Introducing...

Wikipedia:WikiProject Quantum portals (see it's talk page).

Keep on keepin' on

...'til next time,    — The Transhumanist   10:18, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Timeline of Westward Television

I noticed that you have relegated my Westward Television timeline to a draft, and without a redirect, thereby effectively removing it from Wikipedia. I have now made additions to the article, including adding six references. I hope that this will be sufficient for you to revoke the draft status and allow the timeline to be added to Wikipedia. Rillington (talk) 08:32, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Rillington Hi, Greetings. Thank you for the question above and I commend your efforts on searching the right sources for the draft article. I could not access 2 of your sources as there are no links, but from the other sources you provided, the sources are independent and reliable. To say that, there is an existing page Westward Television in English (EN) Wikipedia. The timeline (those that are significant and important ones) of Westward Television's content could be added into the existing page to better the content instead having a separate page just for the timeline for even the draft page is accepted, it would most likely to be nominated to merge with the existing page. It you decided to do that then after move the content over to the existing page, place {{Db-G7}} on top of the draft page and leave an edit summary stating "request drat article to be deleted by creator" before save/publish the edit. Let me know if anything I could help. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:25, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I've removed the two links and added two new references and also added some new information. Whilst I take the point that it still might be seen by some as inadequate as a stand-alone timeline, all of the timelines that I have created are added to beyond their first appearance on Wikipedia. Plus this timeline is part of an ongoing project to create timelines for all of the ITV companies, and it would be a shame if Westward was the only company not to have its own timeline. Therefore I really would like this timeline to be a stand-alone article and not, at best, a subsection of the existing Westward Television page. Do you think that the timeline is now good enough to be added to Wikipedia? Rillington (talk) 17:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Rillington, Kindly clarify what project 'this timeline is part of an ongoing project to create timelines for all of the ITV companies' you meant? Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 23:51, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
It's not a Wikipedia project. It's merely a goal I have set myself, to produce timelines for all of the ITV companies. With hindsight I shouldn't have used the word 'project'. Rillington (talk) 17:17, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Given the two sets of improvements I have made to the article, do you now think that it is of good enough quality to be part of Wikipedia as I would like to formally re-create the article. Rillington (talk) 17:31, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Rillington Good day. Pls do not recreate the article (for it will be duplicated) as it is already in the Wikipedia system as draft. The timeline (those that are significant and important ones) should be included in the existing page Westward Television instead of a separate page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 23:14, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
I accept that to recreate it would result in a duplication but whilst it may be in the system, nobody can read the article. Therefore, given that you have acknowledged the improvements I have made, the solution would be to revoke the draft status and allow it to be viewable, or delete the draft and then re-create the article. Why you will now not accept the article as a stand-alone timeline? Rillington (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Rillington Greetings. As mentioned before time list should be part of the main article and not fork it out to another page as they should be part of the existing page. If you want the info to be viewed then include them in the existing page. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 21:22, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
This seems to be your personal opinion, that you don't consider timelines to be part of Wikipedia and I have never come across anyone else objecting to timelines. Please tell me why you are objecting to my timeline. Rillington (talk) 09:51, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Rillington Pls see List of timelines and Warner Bros. and Apple Inc. don have timeline articles but info is incorporate in the existing article in the history section. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 23:19, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I'm grateful that you have added the above comment to This is Paul's talk page as your views on timelines impact on his efforts as much as they so on mine. I have added my reply to Paul's talkpage and I'd be grateful if you could please reply to my comments on Paul's talkpage. Thank you. Rillington (talk) 08:02, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
I got asked to comment on this as someone who's worked on some of these articles so here goes. As far as I can see, there's been little objection to this up to now, apart from a couple of refimprove templates added here and there. If the problem is the length or lack of information for Westward Television then the solution could be to create a timeline of the ITV South West region, which would incorporate all of the franchise holders that operated in that region. This would make sense here since Westward and TSW were effectively the same company (TSW having purchased Westward). If the concern is about notability then again merging the articles into one with a redirect from each would make sense, as it then creates something if not unique then different. That would be my solution to this as there are a couple of small regions where several companies held the franchise.
Also note that when I've created timelines I've grouped some of the smaller topics together, so for example, there is no Timeline of BBC Four because that would be quite small and may run into a similar problem as the Westward timeline, so it is grouped under Timeline of non-flagship BBC television channels which is of reasonable length and is well sourced.
It is mentioned that information is often incorporated into articles, and I don't know what the general rule is regarding this, but there are timelines for cities, countries and all sorts of subjects which must surely contain duplicate information. Apple, inc. may not have a timeline, but could if someone created it I suppose, and there is a Timeline of Apple Inc. products.
Perhaps I could suggest seeking a third opinion or something similar if you both vehemently disagree about this, which seems to be the case. This is Paul (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
This is Paul Hi, Timeline for company ( such as when the company purchased another company, what happen on the company and etc) commonly is incorporated in the "history section" and especially the the exiting article is still not large in size to fork it out. The reason the user Rillington wanted to fork it out is because that is their personal project which I dont think this is a good reason to do so. Do welcome to you to seek third party opinions. 22:37, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for getting back to me CASSIOPEIA. Rillington had mentioned wanting to create these articles to me and I'd said it was worth going for it. I did privately wonder if it would be possible to do that since the information for a lot of the smaller ITV companies is limited. The three existing timelines covering the South West England ITV region are relatively short, but to combine them would create something of about 13K (which is a reasonable length) and quite well references, and there isn't currently anything that gives a full overview of the topic of ITV in that part of the UK. I have also suggested on my talk page broadening the article's remit to include related topics, such as content they produced for the ITV network, etc.
On the subject of timelines, I don't think a timeline is a fork as such. My understanding of a fork is that it's a new article created from an existing article when more detail is needed about a topic but to add it to the existing article would give undue weight to the topic in that article. From what I can gather about timelines they appear to complement a main article and often contain duplicate information, but in list rather than prose form (see for example BBC and Timeline of the BBC which both mention the BBC's major milestones).
There doesn't seem to be all that much information about timelines, yet we have a lot of them. My suggestion to both of you is to take this either to WP:DRN (I think my involvement precludes it from being a straightforward case of seeking a third opinion) or if there's a WP:MOS discussion board where it can be raised then to have a conversation there. I may even mention this at WP:HELPDESK to see if there is a policy covering the creation of timelines, how and when, etc. This is Paul (talk) 13:28, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
This is Paul Hi, Pls see List of timelines. To me company timeline (when they purchase this company, hired some CEO, etc) should be in the history section as to break out this section to a new article does not make sense especially the existing article is not that big in size. Rillington could submit the article for another reviewer to have a look (I know Reillinton created a number of such articles at late). I think in time, they would nominate to merge back to main article. Cheers. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
ok thanks again for your response. That seems like a reasonable solution. I've asked about this at the helpdesk and someone suggested WP:LISTN as a reference point. That would seem to suggest any topic list to be generally acceptable as long as they concern a notable topic discussed by independent sources, which this does, but there isn't much by way of guidelines to go on. Rillington has has addressed the lack of references which would have been a concern and it does now have a reasonable number of supporting references. Personally, and as eluded to earlier, I would have given these a broader remit, but we're all different. This is Paul (talk) 15:52, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
And given that I have addressed the lack of references, the timeline now fits the criteria for it to be added to Wikipedia as a stand-alone article. Therefore, it should no longer be classed as a draft. Rillington (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I would support moving this back to the main space per WP:LISTN if both of you were in agreement about that. I've never had an article moved to draft space, and don't think I've created anything there for peer review, so I'm not familiar with the protocol in this situation. This is Paul (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
@Rillington and This is Paul: Greetings. Pls read Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists info and requirements. Timeline of a certain company is not a list as the lists in the stand alone article has no links to the list listed. Just because Rillington would like to write the time as their own project in Wikipedia, it does not mean it meet the guidelines of Wikipedia. As according to Rillington, they want the timeline info to be viewed by readers, then incorporate it to the existing article itself as the article is not large in size. As mentioned, you could move the draft to new page or resubmit the article for review by clicking the button atop "submit for review", and one of the reviewers will review it.(note, either the article in draft or new page, they will be subject to be reviewed prior the article is published in mainspace. When an article is in the draft page, there is usually a communication/comment which the reviewers would place in the draft page to guide/inform the creator what the draft article is lacking, how to improve the draft or why the draft is declined. In new page there is not such tools at the moment to facilitate that yet. So if an article is not acceptable, the article will either move to draft space so the editor could work on it, nominate for speedy deletion (CSD), propose for deletion or nominate (PROP), article for deletion (AfD)). Also do note even the article is accepted and published in the mainspace either via draft or new page, it would/might be nominated for AfD f not in a few months or in years down the road if the nominator deem the article fails notability guidelines or nominate to redirect / merge to existing article. If Rillington would like to help on editing/creating content in Wikipedia and I truly believe they do, then expand the existing articles of their interest or create other articles which the subjects are notable and have yet to have a page in Wikipedia. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
@Rillington: @CASSIOPEIA: Thanks for the link, there's some useful information in that which will be good for future reference. I'm not seeing a resubmit button at the top of the draft page so perhaps need to change my preferences or have something installed that I don't currently have. What I'm going to propose is that I merge the information from this timeline and those of TSW and Westcountry to create one unique article titled Timeline of ITV in South West England. This will create something that is better referenced than the current articles (one of the issues raised being the lack of references), and we can have a redirect from each title to the relevant sections of the new article. I know this is then about the franchise rather than the company which wasn't the original intention of these articles, but all three current articles are short, and as was highlighted with the ITV in Wales timeline a timeline of TWW would have been relatively short and that is why there isn't one for that. If you're both in agreement with my proposal then I'll do the merger over the weekend. Hopefully that will then resolve this issue. If in the future someone proposes merging the timelines with the main ITV company articles then that's something to address at the time it happens. This is Paul (talk) 11:35, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@Rillington and This is Paul:, Hi it would be better to write about the "franchise" and add timelines into the article. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:41, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

That's a possible long-term goal. In the short term though there are no franchise articles at present and it doesn't resolve your disagreement. This is Paul (talk) 11:48, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
@This is Paul: The thing is if it is still a time line article, the issue still remains as they should be in the "history section of an article". Timeline articles usually gear toward articles such as arts, history, war, architecture and etc (usually over a "long" period of time and many "events" happen under a common subject which the events would have articles (notable) and also sub articles (notable) related to it.).Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk)
I do find it necessary to state that the over-riding issue for me is that, without discussion, you chose to semi-delete my article by moving it to draftspace rather than flagging up the article as needing improvement and even after I made those improvements to the timeline, which you acknowledged, you did not return the timeline to the main encyclopaedia, because of what seems to be a personal view regarding timelines. Rillington (talk) 14:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
@Rillington and This is Paul:, Rillington, Pls slow down and re-read what I have written above. It is your personal agenda, as you stated "your personal project" to write the article. I am one of the Article for Creation (AfC) and new page (NPP) reviewers in Wikipedia. All new article created either via AfC or new page will need to go through review. If a new page (you you have initially created the article in) is not deemed meet the guideline, we, the reviewer, have the right to move the page to draft space for the creator to rework the draft article to a better stage. You have created more than 200 articles since 2005 - see here see here and should have known the notability guidelines requirements for an article to be accepted in main space - see Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Your article was created without any sources provided for such I moved it to draft space. I have advised you that for what you want to do "time line article" might be nominated to merge/redirect to existing page even if the time line article is accepted in mainspace and did also informed if you guys disagree you could check with other editors for advice which Paul did without any intervention/opinions of mine in the thread in held desk. I have also provided you the links for your own perusal on further info and not only my opinions. You could resubmit the draft space and change the name of the article or merge the content as I had mentioned above. What my advice to you is hope your work would not end up fruitless and nominate to merge/redirect to existing page in the future and that is all. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Cain Velasquez

I believe you are mistaken. I didn't vandalize Cain Velasquez article. I updated the article with what was actually there in the source. The source mentions his father was an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, which I updated. I updated his height as 73.5 inches which is what the source actually says. Please let me know what you think I did, that can be termed as unconstructive edits. Thanks Sharkslayer87 (talk) 00:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sharkslayer87, Greeting and thanks for informing. I have checked the source and your edit was as per sources. I have removed the warning message. My apologies and all faults are mine. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 01:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
:: Hi Cassiopeia, mistakes do happen. Your apology has been accepted and I very much appreciate that you acknowledged there was no fault of mine. Thanks and happy editing. Cheers Sharkslayer87 (talk) 01:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cassiopeia/Archive_16&oldid=946020807"