User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2018-10

This user is one of the 800 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

2004, 2005, 2006-01--2006-06, 2006-07--2006-10, 2006-10--2005-12, 2007-01--2007-06, 2007-07--2007-09, 2007-10--2007-12, 2008-01--2008-06, 2008-07--2008-09, 2008-10--2008-12, 2009-01--2009-03, 2009-04--2009-06, 2009-07--2009-09, 2009-10--2009-12, 2010-01, 2010-02, 2010-03, 2010-04, 2010-05, 2010-06, 2010-07, 2010-08, 2010-09, 2010-10, 2010-11, 2010-12, 2011-01, 2011-02, 2011-03, 2011-04, 2011-05, 2011-06, 2011-07, 2011-08, 2011-09, 2011-10, 2011-11, 2011-12, 2012-01, 2012-02, 2012-03, 2012-04, 2012-05, 2012-06, 2012-07, 2012-08, 2012-09, 2012-10, 2012-11, 2012-12, 2013-01, 2013-02, 2013-03, 2013-04, 2013-05, 2013-06, 2013-07, 2013-08, 2013-09, 2013-10, 2013-11, 2013-12, 2014-01, 2014-02, 2014-03, 2014-04, 2014-05, 2014-06, 2014-07, 2014-08, 2014-09, 2014-10, 2014-11, 2014-12, 2015-01, 2015-02, 2015-03, 2015-04, 2015-05, 2015-06, 2015-07, 2015-08, 2015-09, 2015-10, 2015-11, 2015-12, 2016-01, 2016-02, 2016-03, 2016-04, 2016-05, 2016-06, 2016-07, 2016-08, 2016-09, 2016-10, 2016-11, 2016-12, 2017-01, 2017-02, 2017-03, 2017-04, 2017-05, 2017-06, 2017-07, 2017-08, 2017-09, 2017-10, 2017-11, 2017-12, 2018-01, 2018-02, 2018-03, 2018-04, 2018-05, 2018-06, 2018-07, 2018-08, 2018-09, 2018-10, 2018-11, 2018-12, 2019-01, 2019-02, 2019-03, 2019-04, 2019-05, 2019-06, 2019-07, 2019-08, 2019-09, 2019-10, 2019-11, 2019-12, 2020-01, 2020-02, 2020-03, 2020-04, 2020-05, 2020-06, 2020-07, 2020-08, 2020-09, 2020-10, 2020-11, User Talk:Geo Swan/archive/list

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which has been dedicated to improving contents that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora.

This is a global online edit-a-thon, which is happening in at least 5 language editions of Wikipedia, including the English Wikipedia! Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section, if you haven't done so already.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing Users who are able to achieve the following:

Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
Country Winners
Diversity winner
High quality contributors
Gender-gap fillers
Page improvers
Wikidata Translators

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:50, 03 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Geo Swan:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– —usernamekiran(talk) 12:04, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Disambiguation link notification for October 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sergeant Lacey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joseph Margulies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dawa wa Irshad for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dawa wa Irshad is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dawa wa Irshad until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sheldybett (talk) 05:55, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I recommended redirection, and the article was, eventually, redirected. Geo Swan (talk) 17:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Geo Swan/archive, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Edwin Whitefield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jamestown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Desmond Cole

As has been explained to you before, GNG is not simply a case of counting up the number of media hits that exist and then extending a free notability pass to everybody who happens to surpass an arbitrary number: GNG has tests for the kind of coverage that does or doesn't exist, the geographic range of coverage that does or doesn't exist, the depth of coverage that does or doesn't exist, and the context of what the person is getting coverage for.

Of the 12 links you provided, many of them still represent local coverage, so they don't necessarily prove that I was wrong to assess his notability as "local to a single city". So let's go over why most of them still don't wash as establishing that Cole warrants a presence in an international encyclopedia:

Global News, "Desmond Cole on his experiences with racial discrimination in Toronto" - This is from Global Toronto, not from the national network, and a person's notability cannot be established by interview sourcing in which they're speaking about themselves — it can only be demonstrated by sources in which the person is being spoken or written about, in the third person, by people other than themselves.
Yahoo - Your link does not take me to any source about Desmond Cole, but to the front splash page of today's Yahoo News headlines, such as "Obama delivers sharpest takedown of Trump" and "Saudi Arabia again changes its story on Khashoggi killing". And at any rate, Yahoo is a news aggregator, not a media outlet in its own right, so it's not an establisher of notability under GNG.
Your Morning - This is a short blurb, not substantive coverage for the purposes of counting as a GNG point, and it's a blurb again wrapping a video in which he's talking about himself rather than being spoken or written about in the third person.
Hamilton Spectator - The fact that a Torstar-owned paper, in a city only a short distance away from Toronto and still partially within Toronto's local media market, reaggregated a piece written by a Toronto Star journalist and first published by the Toronto Star does not constitute proof that his coverage is nationalizing. And since the whole basis of the coverage precisely hinges on Desmond Cole's association with the Toronto Star, the Torstar family of publications are not independent coverage for the purposes of establishing notability in that context.
The Globe and Mail, "Toronto Mayor John Tory to introduce motion to end carding in the city" - This source is not about Desmond Cole for the purposes of helping to establish his notability, it just briefly namechecks his existence at the very end of an article about something else.
CTV Toronto, "My responsibility is community safety" - Local source, in which the only mention of Desmond Cole anywhere in the entire page is in the headline of a different story in the "other headlines" sidebar; the actual text of the article itself is not only not about him, it doesn't even mention him at all.
CTV Toronto, "Activist interrupts police board meeting, demanding carding data destroyed" - This one's actually about him, granted, but it's local coverage, thus failing to demonstrate that I was wrong in my assessment of his notability as being localized.
Huffington Post - WP:BLOGS are not reliable sources. Huffington Post can be used as a convenience link when it's reaggregating wire service coverage originating with Canadian Press or Associated Press or something of that ilk — but it's the fact that the coverage originated with CP or AP that it's reliable, not the fact that it's on HuffPo. When the content originates with one of the HuffPo's own staff bloggers, however, that is not evidence of notability at all.
Global News, "New carding rules approved by Toronto police board, historic data will still be retained" - Not about Desmond Cole, but just glancingly namechecks his existence in coverage about something else.
The Globe and Mail, "Desmond Cole’s feature on carding lit a fuse under the city’s elite, but why did it take so long?" — The first source in the entire list that actually starts to count for something.
National Post - Not about Desmond Cole, but just glancingly namechecks his existence a single time in coverage about something else.
Maclean's — Again, more substantive than most of the others.

So the only two sources that are doing anything at all in terms of establishing that he's notable enough for a Wikipedia article are Maclean's and the second G&M hit. But if the context of what they're covering him for doesn't pass any subject-specific inclusion criteria, then two good media hits are not enough coverage to get him over the "notable just because media coverage exists" bar — and none of the other hits are getting him over any bar at all, because they all fail one or more of the depth, range, context or independence tests. Again, GNG is not just an arbitrary number of text matches on the person's name — it tests for the type, depth, range and context of coverage that does or doesn't exist, not just the number of possible footnotes. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be a reply to this comment of 2018-10-22. In that comment I listed twelve urls, and Bearcat's numbered points refer, in turn to them. Urls follow... Geo Swan (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

I don't think you will get anywhere convincing people to stop formatting citations in their preferred methods, I suggest you try out the enhanced diff engine at User:Cacycle/wikEdDiff and see if that helps. Personally I find the diffs it gives are much clearer. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 21:07, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DS Alert

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. ''It does '''not''' imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.'' You have recently shown interest in the English Wikipedia [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]] and [[Wikipedia:Article titles|article titles policy]]. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called [[WP:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions]] is in effect: any administrator may impose [[WP:AC/DS#Sanctions|sanctions]] on editors who do not strictly follow [[Wikipedia:List of policies|Wikipedia's policies]], or any [[WP:AC/DS#Page restrictions|page-specific restrictions]], when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the [[WP:AC/DS#Guidance for editors|guidance on discretionary sanctions]] and the [[WP:ArbCom|Arbitration Committee's]] decision [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation|here]]. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. }}{{Z33}}