Jump to content

User talk:IntoThinAir/Archive 28

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30→Archive 33

Your GA nomination of Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 200.68.129.144 -- 200.68.129.144 (talk) 20:01, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I forgot to log in, but I was not in a relevant place, so that's why I decided to keep the IP there. Anyway, I will review the article when possible, the bot will notify you when I put it on hold. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 00:29, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs)

The article Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tbhotch -- Tbhotch (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs)

The article Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 200.68.129.144 -- 200.68.129.144 (talk) 04:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

DYK for United States Health Care Reform: Progress to Date and Next Steps

On 22 November 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article United States Health Care Reform: Progress to Date and Next Steps, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2016 article United States Health Care Reform: Progress to Date and Next Steps was the first article by a sitting U.S. president to be published in an academic journal? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/United States Health Care Reform: Progress to Date and Next Steps. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, United States Health Care Reform: Progress to Date and Next Steps), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Happy turkey day

Northamerica1000 is wishing you a happy Thanksgiving. If you don't celebrate Thanksgiving, don't forget that "Any time is turkey time" (see image). North America1000 06:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Sapiosexual concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Sapiosexual, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Everymorning. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello there, I am a slightly inexperienced user looking for a mentor to help learn things about Wikipedia. I have been unblocked very recently with a special 1 Revert Rule which must be noted. I also have a topic ban as well. Could you please consider adopting me so that I can get better at using Wikipedia. I am particularly interested in counter-vandalism. Please get back to me as soon as possible. Thank you in advance. Pablothepenguin (talk) 20:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello there, thank you for offering your services as a mentor, however unfortunately, I regret to inform you that I have received an offer from another user which I have accepted. I wish you good luck finding a new user to work with! Pablothepenguin (talk) 20:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
No problem. Everymorning (talk) 20:50, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello IntoThinAir, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
  • Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

  • If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

  • A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
  • Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
  • The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:National Rifle Association people has been nominated for discussion

Category:National Rifle Association people, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:50, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited High Seas (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Route 66 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:28, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Xmas

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Hello Everymorning, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018.
Happy editing,
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:47, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Nomination of John Renna for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Renna 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/John Renna until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.

You are being informed as the second editor to the article and to increase debate. Thank you for your contributions. ―Matthew J. Long -Talk-☖ 19:58, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for starting a new and insightful discussion in WikiProject Medicine. You got an excited response!

I regret the negative publicity you found but am glad you found it and shared it. I logged it further at Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Research publications.

Happy new year - Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:10, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

HNY

Happy New Year!

Best wishes for 2018, —PaleoNeonate – 01:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ) You have also been reported to AIV. Epic Floridian (talk) 14:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello IntoThinAir, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

The Bridge gnossong

I understand your logic but you cannot directly add to a page if it has been redirected because it will redirect before you can make it anyway.Edomrak52 (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Category:Mailman School of Public Health faculty

Nominator's rationale: Duplicate category. Postcard Cathy (talk) 14:39, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Adoption

I've been editing Wikipedia for a few months now, but I still don't fully understand what I'm doing. Having a mentor would help me edit more easily, without having to go back and fix mistakes after my edits. Would you be able to adopt me, if you are still accepting adoptees? Thank you. Antrogh (talk) 03:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll adopt you. Ask away! Everymorning (talk) 03:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Emil Kirkegaard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emil Kirkegaard 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/Emil Kirkegaard until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Bishonen | talk 21:53, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for comments on my editing of Michael A. McDaniel

You are correct that I am the topic of the page, although I did not create the page nor know who created it. My edits have been limited to fixing errors (e.g., years that I received Dean's Scholar from Virginia Commonwealth University) and non-optimal text (e.g., I removed text indicating that I am an organizational psychologist; I grant that my PhD is in industrial/organizational psychology but my work is best classified as industrial psychology and I have made few contributions to organizational psychology). I also corrected the nature of my affiliation with Virginia Commonwealth University. I added personnel selection to replace organizational psychology as that is my primary field.

I added text on current research interests, current employment and Fellowships.

Everything I added is verifiable. Everything I deleted was verifiable as incorrect.

Per your request, I will send any future edits to you for review.

Best wishes,

2601:141:300:8214:8DD0:FBCE:6FB7:474 (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC) Mike McDaniel

Thank you, Dr. McDaniel. I'm glad you have refrained from making major edits to the page given your conflict of interest. I don't see any problems with any of your edits. Everymorning (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Involuntary celibacy has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Involuntary celibacy. Thanks! Mortee (talk) 06:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your BLPN post, see Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles. GMGtalk 17:59, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Involuntary celibacy (February 2)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TeaDrinker was:
Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Much of this should be merged into the Reddit article. The term itself is a neologism and not a topic unto itself. This is certainly a controversial area, and conversation for a split from the reddit article should start on the reddit article talk page.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
TeaDrinker (talk) 12:05, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


Teahouse logo
Hello, Everymorning! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! TeaDrinker (talk) 12:05, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Nobel Prize editors

This guy: Brian Josephson (see talk). I vaguely remember reading about one other long ago, I think it was a WP:SPS thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:55, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TeaDrinker#Neo 92.10.227.10 (talk) 02:38, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello IntoThinAir, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!
The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
  • We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

  • We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
  • Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: YouScience (February 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DGG were:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
DGG ( talk ) 08:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Glen Kuban for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Glen Kuban 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/Glen Kuban until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. DGG ( talk ) 01:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: YouScience has been accepted

YouScience, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Vermont | reply here 11:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Please note that your draft was borderline NPOV. It's definitely there, but isn't enough as to decline the request over that. I'm going to do some checking to see if there's any other sources to add. Vermont | reply here 11:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Your "ProveIt" edit of 2 October 2017 on: History of the race and intelligence controversy

Hello Everymorning. I don't know exactly how the "ProveIt" editing gadget is supposed to work but apparently it failed on your attempt here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_the_race_and_intelligence_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=803511098

I restored the missing text and reference and thought you may wish to find out what went wrong. I can't help you with that except that I did notice a request for bug reports on the ProveIt project page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ProveIt. —Blanchette (talk) 17:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks for fixing that-I certainly hadn't intended to remove the Snyderman/Rothman ref there. Every morning (there's a halo...) 19:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Question about National_Firearms_Agreement

Hi! This is my first time using Wikipedia so forgive me if I make any wiki etiquette mistakes. In reviewing your recent revision on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Agreement, the edit says:

"A study found that there were no mass shooting deaths of five or more in Australia from 1997 through 2016, though the authors note that it is impossible to prove the agreement was the cause."

First, there is no link to this study. Second, the criteria for 5+ to qualify for a mass shooting is not used. It's typically 3+, not including the perp:

The FBI defines mass murder as murdering three, to not include the perpetrator if he or she should die.

According to the Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012, signed into law on Jan 2013, a mass shooting is defined as a shooting resulting in at least 3 victims, excluding the perpetrator.

How would you suggest updating that?

Azevedo2 (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

The thing about the statement that is not sourced that you quoted above is that it doesn't have to be sourced, because it's in the lead, so long as the claim is also present and sourced in the body. This is the case with this statement, which is sourced to this study in the body. The body, specifically, now includes the statement "Simon Chapman and colleagues reported in 2016 that there were no mass shootings in Australia between when the NFA became law and May 2016. The same study also found that "there was a more rapid decline in firearm deaths between 1997 and 2013 compared with before 1997 but also a decline in total nonfirearm suicide and homicide deaths of a greater magnitude." However it doesn't include the thing about how it is impossible to determine the cause, so I'll add that in a second. As for the criteria for a mass shooting, the study just mentioned uses the 5 or more deaths definition, and when discussing this study, we should use this definition too. But if you want to add another reliable source discussing the NFA and this definition of mass shootings, you're welcome to do so. Every morning (there's a halo...) 03:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Incel

I think that your draft involuntary celibacy would gain more traction if you instead named it incel. 92.10.230.62 (talk) 09:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Ajri

Thanks a lot for find that source for Ajri dialect. It was really helpful, and has solved the mystery surrounding that name. However, I do have one nit to pick: I think it would generally be better if such sources are added in a "Further reading" section. Because if it's added as a ref within the text, it very strongly implies that the source backs up the statement that it appears after. – Uanfala (talk) 20:24, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Precious four years!

Precious
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Differential K theory

The article Differential K theory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is no significant coverage from outside the walled garden of racialist research publications except for a scant handful of criticisms.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Differential K theory for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Differential K theory 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/Differential K theory until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 00:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Adopt-a-User

Hi! Remember me? Probably not. I'm Adotchar, just I changed my username and had the old account blocked. Well, I just wanted to inform you that I removed myself from your list of adoptees on the Adopt-a-User project, as it's been over a year since we actually did anything about that, and I am personally accepting adoptees myself. Vermont | reply here 10:58, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Everymorning Can you adopt me? -- Michael Campbell (talk) 14:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, IntoThinAir. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

By the way, your e-mail address gives a delivery failure notice when I try to reply to you directly. I'm hoping the "e-mail user" feature will still work, but you should know about this problem just in case you use that e-mail address for anything else. --Captain Occam (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

James Allsup

Hey,

I am unsure if my ping worked but there is currently a discussion on Talk:James Allsup and since I see you are actively involved on the page you may want to add your two cents. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:IHasCupquake

Hello, Everymorning. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "IHasCupquake".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:03, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Dusty Rhoades for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dusty Rhoades 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/Dusty Rhoades until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Jtrainor (talk) 08:10, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello IntoThinAir, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
Notability
General notability guideline
Subject-specific guidelines
See also

ACTRIAL:

  • ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

  • Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

  • While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

  • The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.
To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

My article

Thanks for improving my article. How I can add knowledge box like other articles.(Nauvak (talk) 21:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC))

Name of the task force

Hi Everymorning,

User:Deleet recently told me that he thinks the psychometrics task force should have a different name, for the reasons he explained here. Since you were the one who created and named this task force, I think it ought to be your decision whether it's renamed or not. Do you have an opinion about that? --Captain Occam (talk) 21:48, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I thought about that, but I think that psychometrics still includes intelligence testing (e.g. IQ tests). I don't think there's a good reason to narrow the scope of the task force to only include intelligence testing and not other psychometric topics. So, in short, I don't think it should be renamed (but am open to arguments to the contrary). Every morning (there's a halo...) 21:59, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
I think Deleet's suggestion is to rename it to something like "Differential psychology task force", rather than making it specific to intelligence. Apparently nowadays, the term "psychometrics" refers to the study of the measurement techniques themselves, but generally doesn't include research about more fundamental aspects of intelligence and personality, such as studies to identify the genetic variants that influence these traits. On the other hand, "differential psychology" includes both types of research. What would you think of it being renamed to "Differential psychology task force"? --Captain Occam (talk) 22:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
I'd be fine with that. I think you and Deleet made good points about "Differential psychology" vs. "psychometrics". Every morning (there's a halo...) 00:37, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Would you be willing to rename the task force yourself? Since you created it, I think it would make more sense for you to be the one who renames it than for me or Deleet to do it. (Also, I'm distracted at the moment by a complaint about me at AE...) --Captain Occam (talk) 07:44, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
AE seems to be concluding that due to my topic ban, I should avoid editing articles related to genes and psychology in general, regardless of whether they involve race or not. So I probably won't be able to help you with the task force anymore after this, as long as my topic ban remains in effect. I wish you the best of luck managing it without me. --Captain Occam (talk) 12:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

One other thing: I hope that this AE thread hasn't excessively tarnished your opinion of me. I recognize that it was quite naive of me to think others would be able to assume good faith about my involvement in the task force, but at the time it didn't occur to me that my actions would be interpreted in this way.

I also hope that what's going on at AE doesn't change your opinion about whether it was a good idea for you to create the task force. None of the editors I've tried to contact have expressed any interest in joining it, so in the end the task force is going to turn out exactly the same as how it would have if I'd never had any involvement in it. I think this is a good thing, because it means the task force will eventually be able to move on without any lingering effects from the drama that I tracked in by trying to participate there. --Captain Occam (talk) 20:27, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I hope it will be able to move on. I didn't really have an opinion of you before this so there wasn't really anything to tarnish. It seems like you were trying not to violate the topic ban but in a wikilawyering sort of push-the-envelope way, which apparently doesn't cut it with your "broadly construed" topic ban. I hope the task force will proceed and be productive, and I don't want it to become a "walled garden" with just me and Deleet editing and assessing all the articles. Every morning (there's a halo...) 20:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
I will talk to some academic researchers in the field to see if they can be convinced to join, at least in an advisory role. Bryan Pesta previously edited Wikipedia (before being harassed out of it) and Timothy Bates has a user. Deleet (talk) 06:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Intelligence journal editorial board members

Have a look at this page. I have added the current board and some past members. A few names are incomplete as I wasn't familiar with them. Some of them should have standalone pages I think. Deleet (talk) 16:11, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Google Preferred

The article Google Preferred has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. wumbolo ^^^ 16:15, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Right-to-carry law, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Donohue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for John A. Kenney Jr.

On 23 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John A. Kenney Jr., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that John A. Kenney Jr. was known as the "dean of black dermatology"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John A. Kenney Jr.. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, John A. Kenney Jr.), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act

Hey Everymorning. I noticed you were pretty much running the show on the CCRA wiki page. Thanks for maintaining it! I know this kind of effort can be thankless at times. My friend and I are working on a service for US constituents to form opinions on bills, vote on them, track their representation, and influence their reps. Right now it's Federal only, but we hope to get into state and local government as well. The summaries we're getting from the Library of Congress are useless. As an example, this is what we already edited down the LoC summary of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act on our site, and it's still not as accessible as it could be. On the other hand, some bills never get a summary at all, like the Assault Weapons Ban of 2018. Our goal with summaries on our site is to help an average American form an opinion on a piece of legislation in 3-10 minutes of reading. Would you have any interest in helping us make these summaries simpler for the American people? Vf-lee (talk) 20:17, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

You can reach me via our chat on the site. There's a chat button on the bottom right. Just click the 'suggest an edit' link next to any bill summary on any bill page. When you sign up, you'll see the featured bills list, which everyone else sees. That list gets updated weekly and needs the most immediate attention. If there's anything feature wise that would make providing summaries easier/better, shoot me a message. Vf-lee (talk) 21:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:Involuntary celibacy

Draft:Involuntary celibacy, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Involuntary celibacy and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Involuntary celibacy during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. –Ammarpad (talk) 22:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Involuntary celibacy

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Involuntary celibacy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2017 Cure Award
In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 02:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Donald L. Trump for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Donald L. Trump 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/Donald L. Trump until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Rusf10 (talk) 02:35, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Brian Boxer Wachler concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Brian Boxer Wachler, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

==

Unwarranted deletion of edit by Everymorning, and no means to communicate

Adam ruins everything

Hi,

My knowledge of what the colloseum was like stems from a book I am reading called animal Liberation by philosopher, Peter Singer, an expert on the history of animal abuse. Adam’s episode on the colosseum fights of Rome has been criticized for falsely painting it as an innocent sporting activity with little to no death. It is upsetting that Adam’s show purports falsehoods that upset animal rights activists and classical historians. That being said, the criticism was not one I found in Singer’s novel, but rather from erudite casual watchers of the show. -ZenZorro — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZenZorro (talk • contribs) 00:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Misbehaving Science

Would you object to moving Misbehaving Science: Controversy and the Development of Behavior Genetics to Misbehaving Science, per article title guidelines at WP:SUBTITLES and WP:CONCISE?

Thanks for that. It's not a firm rule (like most things on Wikipedia), but an oft-ignored or overlooked guideline. --Animalparty! (talk) 03:59, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Self-trout

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

For not checking the previous two nominations before nominating WP:LTA for deletion, and for (apparently) not thinking through whether the nomination was itself a good idea before doing so. Every morning (there's a halo...) 04:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IntoThinAir/Archive_28&oldid=1143064586"