Jump to content

User talk:LJF2019

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user is not an administrator.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WP:RETENTION: This editor is willing to lend a helping hand. Just ask.

Barnstars
The Anti-Vandalism + STiki Barnstar

Congratulations, CatcherStorm! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:56, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Special Barnstar
For Rejecting Season 3 of The Masked Singer and so starting discussion of whether to accept it that should have started earlier if the proponents had been paying attention. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:09, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse Host Badge Teahouse Host Badge
Awarded to hosts at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time.

Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
The Editor's Barnstar
From Wiki tamil 100 10:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar
i have wrote extra things about walajabad taluk . tamil 11:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
great wiki trophy
wikipedian tamil 11:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
PROMOTION
Hello, you have reviewed an wikipedia article and you have specify it as promotion. This is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laerta

I really do not understand as you will find the same pages on wikipedia that are online, where is the difference. The source is independent, we have added the newspaper links that have talked for this person, where is the problem. You can review these sources and you can see how independent are these newspaper, is the problem that they are albanian newspaper? Why all the foreign news are independent as we have seen to the other people on wikipedia, this is really a racism. VioMuc1 (talk) 09:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]



Archived

[edit]

Page has been archived. LJF2019 talk 04:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2022

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022

[edit]

Hello LJF2019,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022

Suggestions:

  • There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
  • Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
  • Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
  • This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

The Signpost: 31 October 2022

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2022

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]

The Signpost: 1 January 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

[edit]

Hello LJF2019,

New Page Review queue December 2022
Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Article patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
  • There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on - Articles for creation: History of Hartlepool United F.C.

[edit]

I was wondering if you could give me more feedback on the draft that failed review today: Draft:History of Hartlepool United F.C.. Your reason was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Would you please give me some additional feedback on the page? Michaeldble (talk) 13:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Michael, I wrote on the article that you should consider merging the content you created into the existing article at Hartlepool United F.C.. LJF2019 talk 22:27, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association

[edit]

Thank you for acting so quickly on approving this article. As I mentioned to QuantumRealm, if something is notable, it's notable. How can I (or other editors) go about doing a better job on this? I have added 28 citations, all (I think) secondary and not connected with the subject. Should I search for more? If one citation is good, are two better? Any help you can give me would be most appreciated.

Thanks. Hamish barebones (talk) 18:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

[edit]

Hello LJF2019,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol needs your help!

[edit]
New pages awaiting review as of June 30th, 2023.

Hello LJF2019,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

added source

[edit]

Hi, I had previously updated the Imprisonment section of Jerry Sandusky, the prev version said he's attempting to obtain a new trial, I updated this w/o references & you deleted it as unsourced. I attempted to put in the ref's, one is a copy of the motion for new trial which I uploaded to web archive. I know it is the real motion as I've discussed it by email with the principals, but I'd rather have a link to it on court pages. The second ref is now to one of the articles describing the hearing where the motion was denied.

I do know the ref to the actual file is not great as one has no way to verify that the document is a legitimate copy of the motion entered into trial. Please consider working with me or other editors on this rather than a simple delete. Createangelos (talk) 00:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol newsletter

[edit]

Hello LJF2019,

New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need help, please: Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association

[edit]

Hello, LJF2019

I wrote this article in 2022 and submitted it for review, which took about four months. Editor QuantumRealm reviewed and approved the article saying, "Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions. The article has been assessed as C-Class…. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 19% of accepted submissions — kudos to you!" Then 45 minutes later, he “disapproved” the article and moved it back to “Draft” status, saying . “I apologize for any misunderstanding that may have occurred. After further consideration, I decided to draftify the article because it requires some additional improvements and sources to meet Wikipedia's content guidelines and notability criteria.”

I asked QuantumRealm for specifics; he responded by telling me to check “…notability guidelines…reliable sources and …verifiability." I then asked him four specific questions relative to the broad guidelines; he never responded.

Returning to work on the article, I added more content and more citations, then resubmitted the article for approval which you, LJF2019, provided on 20 May, leaving the “notability” tag in place. Working more on the article, I posted it to the TeaHouse in July, asking for help in improving the piece. One editor responded, posting broad guidelines – “Article topics must receive significant coverage that is independent of the subject and comes from reliable, secondary sources.” Shortly thereafter, the request was archived. I continued to add content and citations which came from independent, reliable, secondary sources.

I would like to move on to improving other articles and, perhaps, creating more on my own. But, before I do that, I would like to get the “notability” template removed. PMA, the organization charged with overseeing and promoting manufacturing in the country’s fifth-largest manufacturing state for 114 years is notable. I don't want revert anything by myself, (I firmly believe in Wikipedia consensus) so I’m reaching out to you for guidance. How should I proceed? Thanks for your help. Hamish barebones (talk) 18:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hamish barebones,
Thank you for reaching out and for your diligence in creating and improving the article on the Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association. Your commitment to the Wikipedia community is evident and deeply appreciated.
I understand your frustration regarding the notability concerns. Wikipedia's notability guidelines, especially for organizations and companies, can be challenging to navigate, but they are essential to ensure the quality and reliability of the content on the platform.
Given the detailed context you've provided:
I recommend gathering a comprehensive list of the independent, reliable, secondary sources you've added to the article since it was last reviewed. This list can be used to make a clear case for the article's notability, ensuring it stands on solid ground against Wikipedia's guidelines.
Engage with other experienced Wikipedia editors, preferably those with expertise in assessing notability for organizations. You can reach out in relevant WikiProjects, or on the Talk page of the article, presenting your case and the list of sources.
If, after a discussion, there is consensus among editors that the notability criteria are met, then the notability template can be safely removed. It's always a good practice to ensure multiple eyes review the changes for consensus, as you rightly pointed out.
If the notability concerns persist, consider starting an "Articles for Deletion" (AfD) discussion. This process will allow a wider community of editors to weigh in on the article's notability, and potentially reach a clear consensus on its inclusion.
I appreciate your dedication to improving Wikipedia, and I'm here to support you every step of the way. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you have further questions or need additional guidance.
Warm regards,
LJF2019 talk 18:25, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:LJF2019 Began implementing the suggestions you made. Thanks! Hamish barebones (talk) 19:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November Articles for creation backlog drive

[edit]

Hello LJF2019:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1100 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, 141Pr {contribs} 18:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

[edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More help - Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association

[edit]

Thanks for your help in my attempts to demonstrate the notability of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association. On your recommendations, I completed the following:

A. I gathered and posted on PMA’s talk page a comprehensive list of the independent, reliable, secondary sources (32 of them) and asked other editors if they could help by adding more or objecting to those listed. No one responded. This list does make a clear case for the organization’s notability, as all citations are verifiable, independent and reliable.

B. I posted a request for help on the Teahouse. One editor responded with broad guidelines – “Article topics must receive significant coverage that is independent of the subject and comes from reliable, secondary sources.” Then the request was archived.

C. I posted a “Help me” template on my talk page, requesting help from other editors in demonstrating or improving the notability requirements request. I received a response from one editor who told me my use of the “Help me” template was incorrect, and that the “Notability” tag itself was a request for help, not a “black mark.” No other editors responded.

D. It appears, from the responses I’ve received, that PMA may be notable, but it is not a high interest topic to other editors. Not one editor has offered any specific reasons why PMA should be considered either notable or, in this case, not notable.

At this point I would like to suggest that I have done about as much as an editor can do to demonstrate notability. I further suggest that either you or I post a paragraph on the PMA talk page that provides a summary of points A-D above and recommend building consensus for removing the tag. We could set a deadline of several weeks or so to see whether any editors had any particular hypotheses one way or another. Then, unless there were specific objections, remove the tag. Your thoughts? Hamish barebones (talk) 17:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hamish barebones,
Thank you for your diligent follow-up and the considerable efforts you've made in addressing the notability concerns for the Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association (PMA) article. Your approach and the steps you've taken clearly demonstrate a commitment to improving Wikipedia and adhering to its content guidelines.
Given the actions you've detailed:
A. The compilation and posting of a comprehensive list of 32 independent, reliable, secondary sources is commendable. It's unfortunate that there hasn't been more engagement from other editors, but the lack of response does not diminish the significance of your efforts or the potential notability of PMA.
B. Your initiative to seek assistance through the Teahouse and the use of the "Help me" template, even if it did not yield the desired feedback, shows a proactive approach to seeking community input and improvement for the article.
C. It's insightful to understand that the "Notability" tag is not a detriment but rather a call to action for further improvement and verification of notability, as pointed out by the editor who responded to your "Help me" request.
D. The perception that PMA may not be a high-interest topic to other editors, while challenging, does not inherently affect the notability of the subject as per Wikipedia's guidelines.
Your suggestion to post a summary of points A-D on the PMA talk page and to build a consensus for removing the notability tag is a sound strategy. It aligns with Wikipedia's collaborative and consensus-driven nature. Setting a deadline for feedback allows for a reasonable time frame for editors to present any objections or additional insights.
Here's my view:
Posting on the PMA Talk Page: I agree with your plan to summarize the efforts and sources that substantiate the PMA's notability on its talk page. This summary will serve as a clear, transparent record of the attempts made to address notability concerns.
Building Consensus: Proposing a deadline for feedback is a pragmatic approach to moving forward. I would recommend allowing a period of 3 to 4 weeks, which gives ample time for any interested editors to contribute their views or additional sources.
Next Steps Post-Deadline: If there are no substantial objections or additional concerns raised by the deadline, we can proceed with a consensus to remove the notability tag. It's essential, however, to document this process on the talk page clearly, indicating that an open invitation for discussion was provided and that the consensus was reached based on the lack of opposing views.
Article for Deletion (AfD) as a Last Resort: If there's still uncertainty about the notability or if there are unforeseen objections, an AfD discussion might be necessary. This step would further solidify the community's stance on the article's notability.
I appreciate your dedication to Wikipedia and your willingness to engage with the community's processes to ensure the quality and reliability of its content. I'm here to support your efforts and to assist in facilitating this next step. Please let me know how you wish to proceed, and if you'd like me to initiate the post on the talk page or if you prefer to do so. LJF2019 talk 07:04, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your help. I thought it might be better if you were to initiate a post on the talk page; you certainly know your way around Wikipedia better than I do.
I did take a shot at content for the post. Here it is. Please revise it to your heart's content; my prose is far from deathless. I thought it might be easier for you to have something to start with.
For PMA Talk page:
I have been working with User:Hamish barebones to improve the article Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association. He had requested my help in removing the “Notability” template from the article.
To date, here's what’s been done:
1. Citations - Total number of Citations – 32, each an independent, recognized media or publishing source.
Sources –
Sources from the subject of the article – None
University/higher education publishing
University of Pennsylvania Press – 5 citations
Pennsylvania State University Press – 1 citation
Commercial Book Publishers
Dorrance Publishing, Pittsburgh – 2 citations
Vanguard Press, New York City – 1 citation
MacMillan and Co., New York City – 1 citation
Newspaper, Magazine Publishers
New York Times, New York City – 6 citations
Bloomberg, New York City 1 citation
PennLive, Mechanicsburg, PA – 3 citations
Insurance Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, - 2 citations
Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Pittsburgh – 1 citation
City & State PA, Philadelphia – 1 citation
Inside Sources DV Journal, Washington DC – 1 citation
Pennsylvania Business Report, Washington DC – 1 citation
Pittsburgh Business Times, Pittsburgh, 1 citation
TribLive, Taretum, PA 1 citation
NorthcentralPA.com. Williamsport, PA – 1 citation
Philadelphia Magazine, Philadelphia – 1 citation
Trade Journals
Reliable Plant, Tulsa, OK 1 citation
Energy News Network, St. Paul, MN 1 citation
This list was posted on the talk page of the article; no editors commented or objected to any of them.
2. Teahouse
An explanation of the issue and request for help was posted on the Teahouse. One editor responded with broad guidelines on notability. The request was then archived.
3. User:Hamish barebones posted a “Help me” request on his talk page. One editor responded with information that the “Help me” request was used incorrectly. This editor also noted that the “notability” template was also a request for help, not a negative.
4. User:Hamish barebones continued to update with article and add new citations on his updates.
A conclusion from responses to this activity is that, although the PMA may not be of high interest to other editors, this does not affect the notability.
Quite a bit has been accomplished on this article, so I would like to propose that the “notability” template be removed. In the Wikipedia spirit of cooperation and consensus, could editors read the article, check the citations, and let us know whether they concur with this conclusion?
I suggest that we set a deadline of 15 March 2024 and make our decision then. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Hope this helps. Hamish barebones (talk) 19:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:LJF2019 I posted a request to you (above) about ten days ago and you did not respond. I hope I made some mistake in the post or that you're relaxing on a warm beach someplace. But I'm trying again and hope I'm not a pest. We'll have to push the suggested deadline for response back a bit, but that's easy. Thanking you in advance.Hamish barebones (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:LJF2019 I hope all is well with you. Since I have not received a response to my request above, I will post it on the PMA talk page. And again, hope you are on a warm beach or in an interesting city. Thanks for all your help in this; I'll keep you up to date on how things go. Hamish barebones (talk) 19:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

[edit]

Hello LJF2019,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 June 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free use File:Tony Soprano 2.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Tony Soprano 2.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. hinnk (talk) 05:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing with:
hinnk (talk) 05:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi hinnk,
I’ve noticed that you’re targeting images I uploaded and pushing for them to be replaced with pictures that you personally uploaded. This goes beyond a simple concern for adhering to Wikipedia’s non-free content policy. It seems more like an attempt to assert control over these pages, which raises questions of bias and conflict of interest.
The images I’ve uploaded serve an important function for their respective character articles. The characters of The Sopranos are defined by their specific portrayal in the show, and generic, freely-licensed images cannot capture the essence of the actors’ performances or the visual style that made these characters iconic. The non-free content criterion specifically allows for images like these when there are no suitable free alternatives, which is exactly the case here.
Moreover, the way you’ve edited the image pages, adding infoboxes recommending replacements with your own uploads, clearly indicates that you’re not acting impartially. This behavior is inappropriate and could be seen as a misuse of your editorial privileges.
I’ll be contesting these proposed deletions and bringing this matter to the attention of administrators. If this continues, I’ll be raising the issue of your conflict of interest as well.
I’m more than willing to discuss this further if you have genuine concerns, but if your intention is to replace valid non-free content with your own contributions, then I’ll take the necessary steps to prevent that.
Best, LJF2019 talk 05:37, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The images I uploaded are free alternatives made available by HBO under a CC-BY-3.0 license. If you think they aren't suitable replacements, you're welcome to mark the versions you uploaded as {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed}}. And obviously if you think there was something untoward with my replacing the images, you're welcome to raise the matter wherever you think is appropriate. hinnk (talk) 05:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your claim that the images you've uploaded are suitable replacements simply because they are available under a CC-BY-3.0 license from HBO misses the fundamental issue. The images I provided are critical for accurately representing the characters as they appear in The Sopranos. They capture specific moments and nuances of the characters that generic promotional images cannot replicate.
The images you've uploaded lack the contextual depth necessary for a comprehensive understanding of the characters. Promotional materials often fail to convey the intricate expressions, settings, and interactions that are essential for illustrating the characters' development and significance within the series. Replacing carefully selected screenshots with these generic images diminishes the quality and informational value of the articles.
Furthermore, your pattern of targeting multiple images that I have uploaded and substituting them with your own raises serious concerns about your intentions. This behavior suggests a conflict of interest and appears to prioritize your contributions over the integrity of the encyclopedia. Such actions are contrary to Wikipedia's principles of neutrality and collaborative editing.
The non-free content policy permits the use of copyrighted images when no free alternative can serve the same encyclopedic purpose. In these cases, the specific screenshots are irreplaceable for illustrating the characters as they are known to viewers. Your insistence on replacing them without considering their unique value undermines the articles' accuracy and completeness.
If you genuinely believe that the images you've provided are more appropriate, it would have been constructive to initiate a discussion on the relevant talk pages before unilaterally making replacements. Your dismissive suggestion that I can dispute your actions after the fact does not align with Wikipedia's collaborative spirit. LJF2019 talk 05:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be direct. I disagree with several points you've made, I think the case for "captur[ing] specific moments and nuances of the characters" is tenuous, and because my browser's AI content detection plugin is going wild right now, I'm not willing to discuss this further on your talk page.
Thank you for laying out your justifications on the files' respective talk pages. I'm sure that'll help the reviewing admin make a decision about what the best next steps are. hinnk (talk) 06:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's amusing that you dismiss my arguments as "tenuous" without offering any substantial rebuttal, and then cite your browser's "AI content detection plugin" as a reason to avoid further discussion. If a plugin is preventing you from engaging in a meaningful conversation, perhaps it's not me who should be reconsidering their approach.
Whether or not you believe my points were crafted with the assistance of AI doesn't diminish their validity.
Deflecting the issue by pointing to an "AI alert" seems like a convenient way to sidestep the actual discussion about the suitability of the images.
The core matter remains: the images I've uploaded are crucial for accurately representing the characters in The Sopranos. They capture specific nuances and contexts that generic, freely licensed images do not. Replacing them without adequately addressing these points does a disservice to the encyclopedia.
Since you're unwilling to engage further, I'll leave it to the reviewing administrators to assess the justifications I've laid out on the files' talk pages. I trust they will consider the merits based on policy and the best interests of Wikipedia. LJF2019 talk 06:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files listed for discussion

[edit]

Some of your images or media files have been listed for discussion. Please see Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2024 October 3 if you are interested in preserving their usage.

Thank you. hinnk (talk) 03:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 12:42:47, 11 October 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Kalsingh2023

[edit]


Hi, unfortunately my submission was rejected, citing that the submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article.

I believe that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article, going be this specific criteria mentions for Creative professionals - "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series); " The subject has created and co-created multiple such works - and all works have multiple articles and reviews. Please let me know if I am missing something here. Best regards,

Kalsingh2023 (talk) 12:42, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LJF2019&oldid=1258278313"