Jump to content

User talk:Mz7/March–May 2018

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

added Lourdes
removed AngelOfSadnessBhadaniChris 73CorenFridayMidomMike V
† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

17:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

sources

Hi. Long time. I hope all is well with you.
I am aware findagrave is not reliable source. But on this page, there is a link to the photo of a grave-stone. I was wondering if we could use it as source for subject's middle name? I couldn't find any other source mentioning his middle name. I mean, no matter which website it is, the accuracy of the grave-stone on the middle name cant be disputed, right? What are your thoughts? TPS are welcome to join as well. Also pinging Ritchie333usernamekiran(talk) 08:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

I generally err on the side of respecting privacy. If the subject's middle name is not well-known, or documented in generally acceptable sources, there's usually a reason for it and we should err on the side of not including it. I had a similar problem with Tony Stratton Smith - I can't find a source for his date of birth anywhere, only the year, although there must be public records of it somewhere. I see an IP has since added it without a source and it has propagated all over the internet onto mirrors, making online fact checking near impossible. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: hmm. You are right. We shouldn't invade his privacy. Also, is legacy.com a reliable source (only for DOB, and DOD)? —usernamekiran(talk) 05:23, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran: I'd say "probably not" on legacy.com. It appears to be a database of obituaries, and you can typically find obituaries in more reliable publications, such as newspapers or a library database. My thoughts on including dates of birth and full names align with Ritchie333's; I also tend to err on the side of privacy and only publish such information if it is clearly reported in a highly visible reliable source (on the basis that Wikipedia is a highly visible reliable source, so we wouldn't be drawing undue attention to obscure personal information). Mz7 (talk) 08:58, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
I can understand what you guys are saying. But the problem is, I've been creating articles on military/intel persons. And these guys are not exactly "famous", nor have coverage like film actors or some attention seeking persons. So finding their exact DOB/DOD is sort of difficult. The official/govt sources mention only the years. Like this source from airforce, which says "General Martin was born in Fairforest, S.C., in 1927.", and not the exact date. As they are (mostly "were") govt uniformed officials, keeping precise details discreet is "suggested". But in case they have passed away, I think it is okay to include exact dates if some reliable source already has it published. —usernamekiran(talk) 09:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
I think the official Air Force website is fine to use a source to include the birth/death date. The most relevant policy regarding privacy for this kind of information is WP:BLPPRIVACY, which applies primarily to living people only, but I think the spirit of the policy also asks we consider privacy for the family of the deceased who may be still living. I suppose common sense is the best approach in cases like this. Mz7 (talk) 10:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Feathers: The Evolution of a Natural Miracle 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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

19:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

The article Feathers: The Evolution of a Natural Miracle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Feathers: The Evolution of a Natural Miracle 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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:41, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Protection

Please protect Gina Lollobrigida as soon as possible because the trolls are not stopping. 2602:306:3357:BA0:901F:EC62:88A8:EE7F (talk) 23:04, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for drawing my attention to that. It's somewhat bizarre how the article is suddenly receiving a lot of attention today. Mz7 (talk) 23:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Greg Burke (journalist)

Yes you are right. Smiley Sorry!Kiwipat (talk) 05:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mz7

I would like to student of your academy? For right use of Anti-Vandalism. Thank You, Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 13:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: Sure. I've created your page at User:Mz7/CVUA/Siddiqsazzad001. Please take a look and answer the preliminary questions. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. Mz7 (talk) 20:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: Why you respond so late? To feedback at CVUA. Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 14:53, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
@Siddiqsazzad001: It was already really late at night when I gave my feedback last night, so I only had time for a few quick edits before going to sleep. (I just woke up.) I’ll post your next assignment soon. Mz7 (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

15:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Reviewing my edit

Hi! I created the page for Fear the Walking Dead season 4 and you declined it in January. It's been hveily edited and I think it should be an actual article now. Can you take a look at it and possibly approve it? Thanks. — Hurricane Seth (talk) 02:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fear_the_Walking_Dead_(season_4)

@Hurricane Seth: I can see the draft possibly surviving if we move it to mainspace today, though I do also see the ongoing opposition from AlexTheWhovian on the talk page. Ultimately, I'm not sure. I think that the subject is noteworthy enough that an article about the season is probably going to be justified. We do now have episode names, a release date, and a more detailed cast list, which is an improvement over what we had in January, but that information is already presented in the main article for Fear the Walking Dead. Mz7 (talk) 06:47, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: Thanks for the reply. Honestly, I see where both you and AlexTheWhovian are coming from. I just think it's inevitable that the article will be created, as seasons 1–3 of Fear the Walking Dead and seasons 1–8 of The Walking Dead all have main articles. It's also easier to just view the season 4 article, where you can see the entire cast, the episode names, and production details. Whereas, you would have to view two articles (the main Fear article for the cast and production and what not and the list of episodes article to view the episodes). — Hurricane Seth (talk) 09:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: You never gave me a definite answer about reviewing the edit. Do you think it's good enough to be created as an actual article? Hurricane Seth (talk) 23:34, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
@Hurricane Seth: The reason a definite answer wasn't forthcoming was simply because I'm not sure. I've asked for further input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. Mz7 (talk) 23:53, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

103.204.117.68

103.204.117.68 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

Hi,

Thank you for blocking this IP address. Just thought I'd let you know (if you don't already know) that this IP address has a fairly long history of vandalism and two prior blocks. Looking at the edit summaries from this IP address, it's pretty clear that this is the same person who was blocked previously and I don't think that collateral damage is going to be an issue here. In that light, I would have figured that a longer block duration would be in order (anywhere from 1 to 3 months, give or take), and that they'll just come back soon after the short 31 hour block expires. Regards. 24.205.75.247 (talk) 04:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from. Based on the past entries in the block log and the puerile nature of almost all of the edits from the IP, I've gone ahead and increased the block duration to 3 months. Mz7 (talk) 06:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Mz7. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:34, 22 March 2018 (UTC). 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.

TheSandDoctor Talk 19:34, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Replied --TheSandDoctor Talk 18:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

greetings!

hello sir, sorry to bother you but i would appreciate it so much if i could have a word with you online, like on insta or twitter or other for a couple of minutes, i would extremely appreciate it!, and it would mean alot for me if you did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arabos (talkcontribs) 02:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Arabos: Sorry, but I would prefer to have the conversation here on this talk page. If it needs to be private, you can also email me using Special:EmailUser/Mz7. Mz7 (talk) 02:16, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
ok, but you don't have any online site/app for quick chatting? like insta, twitter, messenger, telegram etc.
  if you have and you don't want to give out your user, pick any of the social media apps and i will give you my user and you can send me a message :)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arabos (talkcontribs) 02:44, 26 March 2018 (UTC) 

20:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination - Successful

Hey Mz7

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandisegiveaway@wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! Seddon (WMF) (talk) 16:33, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Seddon (WMF): Wow, that's really awesome! I've sent the email, subject line "Merchandise Giveaway - User:Mz7". Mz7 (talk) 04:49, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations! Glad you heard back from my nomination from last year . --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:43, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:20, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

@Cahk:  Done. Thanks for the tip, Mz7 (talk) 07:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello Mz7, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

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)

Re:Joke AfDs

Please give me a prime example SansUT (talk) 00:33, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@SansUT: In the case of your AfD, this was the edit you needed to make in order to avoid the issue with the bot. Mz7 (talk) 00:37, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks for informing me. SansUT (talk) 00:42, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank you for assisting in stopping a persistent disruptive editor by implementing a range block. Evaluating the situation and discussing the best response is often an important process for admins. Also, thank you for making yourself available on IRC and ready to step in. Mkdw talk 22:35, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey, Mz7. Regarding this, do you mind clarifying what you meant? I noted here that inline citations typically going after punctuation like commas or periods (as also noted at WP:REFPUNCT) doesn't mean that punctuation needs to be where it doesn't belong. WP:INTEGRITY is also something to keep in mind. And WP:CITEFOOT notes WP:INTEGRITY.

On a side note: Since I'm still watching your talk page, there's no need to ping me to it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:46, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Flyer22. I'm happy to clarify. I don't think I've introduced new punctuation where it doesn't belong here; I've simply shifted the Rotten Tomatoes citation to the end of the sentence after the period. It's simply out-of-style for a citation not to follow punctuation, as it disrupts the flow of the sentence for the reader. WP:CITEFOOT does note that if a word or phrase is particularly contentious, then the citation can go directly next to that word, but I don't think this case is particularly contentious. I can somewhat see where you're coming from regarding WP:INTEGRITY – it may be possible that a reader could be misled to think the Rotten Tomatoes score and the Metacritic score are both supported by both citations – however, I think a common sense reading of the article on the part of the reader makes this a non-issue. It's clear from the context which citation supports which piece of information. Mz7 (talk) 01:14, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. I wasn't stating that you introduced new punctuation; I was simply stating that punctuation does not need to exist for a reference to go after a word. What WP:REFPUNCT and CITEFOOT are stating is that we typically should not have a punctuation come after a reference when punctuation exists, but it seems to me you have interpreted this strictly. For the sentence in question, for example, the period comes at the end of the sentence. The thing that editors should worry about for that sentence is to not have a reference placed directly before the comma or the period to come directly after a reference. It doesn't mean that a reference shouldn't go after a part it directly supports. So the following would be incorrect: "achieving ratings of 47% and 4.5/10[146][147], respectively." So would this: "achieving ratings of 47% and 4.5/10, respectively[146][147]." But I don't see that this next piece (what you changed) was incorrect: "achieving ratings of 47%[146] and 4.5/10, respectively.[147]" I'm not too bothered by the edit you made. Looks-wise, I prefer the references to be like that as well. It's your rationale that I questioned. Maybe it's something we should ask about at the WP:Manual of Style talk page. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:42, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
@Flyer22 Reborn: Ah, I see. That's really interesting – I can see how my interpretation of the guideline may be too strict. Thanks for pointing that out. I've noticed that generally citations only follow punctuation in articles with few exceptions, which what I thought the guideline was referring to. However, after reflecting on your comments, your interpretation of the guideline may be more correct than mine. Mz7 (talk) 19:04, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

added 331dotCordless LarryClueBot NG
removed Gogo DodoPb30SebastiankesselSeicerSoLando

Guideline and policy news

  • Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
  • Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
  • The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
  • The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

  • A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

19:28, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Very odd

I have no idea what happened with this report [40] that you removed as 11 months stale. If I screwed up, sorry, but it seems unlikely. I think the DB must have lost some edits since I don't see my undo on Sutherland Secondary School that led to the report, and I do remember making one. Since there are no edits showing on that article for the last 4 months I would not have seen the article or the editor on my recent changes patrol if the history were correct.. No biggie. I'll check the history in a few days just for my peace of mind. Meters (talk) 05:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

188.29.164.211

Please revoke talk page access from 188.29.164.211 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

@Pkbwcgs:  Done, thanks. Mz7 (talk) 10:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Was not smart for a moment: changed the block reason without actually changing the block setting. Now actually  Done. Mz7 (talk) 10:21, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi. You blocked this user this morning. Just wanted to ask if you could tell me which other accounts they used? Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Green Giant. The block was first and foremost for its harassment of Acroterion. Before blocking, I took a cursory look through the revision history of Acroterion's user talk page, and I could see a pattern of similar harassment, which is why the block reason says "abusing multiple accounts". Here are a few accounts that recently harassed Acroterion with similar language:
That being said, Acroterion is an administrator who I'm sure could have attracted the ire of multiple different sockmasters, so it is not immediately clear whether these are all one person or more. Just scroll through the revision history, and I'm positive you can find more instances, including some IPs. Mz7 (talk) 15:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Cheers, I’ll do that. Green Giant (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:03, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done Mz7 (talk) 07:18, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Further input for FTWD s4

Hello there! Have you received further input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television? It's been a week and I was wondering if you'd gathered enough input to approve or decline the FTWD article? thanks. — Hurricane Seth (talk) 13:19, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

@Hurricane Seth: I took a look, and it doesn't seem like anyone else has taken the invitation and left an additional comment. I've left a comment of my own that hopefully addresses your concerns. Mz7 (talk) 04:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: Thank you so much for your input and I look forward to seeing the article moved to the mainspace! — Hurricane Seth (talk) 06:09, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

18:08, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

My Task Completed

Hi Mz7,

My task complete at User:Mz7/CVUA/Siddiqsazzad001. Waiting for the next assignment. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 04:38, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: Excellent. I'll take a look at it later today or early tomorrow. Mz7 (talk) 08:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

@Mz7: Another task is complete. You can take a look at it. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 13:36, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

@Siddiqsazzad001: Hi, sorry for the delay. I'll take a look at it tonight. Mz7 (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7:  Thanks. Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 05:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: Progress test complete. - Siddiqsazzad001 </Talk> 15:29, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Delation

Hi Dear i want to ask you how can any body delete Article without read talk page discussion. Kumarjisk (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Kumarjisk. To answer your question in a general sense, Wikipedia administrators have the discretion to delete pages unilaterally (that is, without the need for discussion) if they meet one or more of a specific set of criteria. You can find these criteria at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. Mz7 (talk) 06:45, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

🙏

Thank you for the welcome note buddy! SammySmith8765 (talk) 07:33, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Oriental Ruthless Boy

Hey can you help me create my page because I don’t know how that much and I’m new to Wikipedia, can you help me with Oriental Ruthless Boys/Boy and thanks ORB 559 (talk) 18:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I have responded to your same question at the Teahouse. Mz7 (talk) 19:36, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

15:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:International Baccalaureate logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:International Baccalaureate logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Yeenosaurus (talk) 🍁 03:15, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

FYI: we have a template for that

The issue of user repeatedly reporting possible username violations with no edits has been going on long enough and regularly enough that we have a template for it {{UAA-no edits}}. You can add it to your custom warnings in Twinkle. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:28, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

You closed this as Merge, but I was under the impression that we typically do not merge unsourced info. The entire article is unsourced but obviously came from the one external link, to a primary source, which appears to have since been redirected from coppersquare.com to dtphx.org (downtown phoenix.org). While it is reasonable to mention in Downtown Phoenix that the core was branded for a time as Copper Square, that info would have to be added with independent sources. I don't see anything to merge from this article, and even a redirect is not warranted at this point since the term does not presently exist in the Downtown Phoenix. MB 02:29, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi MB. I generally take a loose definition of “merge” at AfD; it is ultimately an editorial decision what content should be merged, and if everything in an article is unsourced, I’ve observed that many “merge” outcomes are practically synonymous with “redirect”. I’ve gone ahead and redirected the article on that basis.
Reading the discussion, my understanding is that the topics are clearly linked, and absent a consensus to delete, I saw this as the most natural compromise solution that reflects the consensus of the discussion. Redirects are cheap, and we don’t necessarily require that the redirect title be mentioned in the target article in order for the redirect to exist (cf Category:Redirects to an article without mention) because a mention can always be added by an interested editor later. I hope this helps explain my reasoning a bit, but since the discussion was admittedly limited, I wouldn’t mind reversing my close and relisting the discussion for another week, if you wish. Mz7 (talk) 02:47, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
No need to relist. Redirect is fine, although I don't think in this case WP:R#ASTONISH is met and Copper Square should be mentioned - but I'll leave that up to the editors that said Merge. I do request that you edit the discussion close to say Redirect instead of Merge as that makes a difference in my AFD Statistics. Thank you. MB 03:24, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
@MB: I don't see any major problems with that, so  Done. Mz7 (talk) 03:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Question

This is the only way i could ask something. I think My article On the Australian Spinosaurid was fine as it was. I did not want it taken down so quickly as i was waiting for some rumored new fossil metrical of certain dinosaurs to come in. Sorry if i sound a bit rushed i am in School right now. Rapator and An Unnamed Newzeland Theropod have their own pages too so why not this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bubblesorg (talkcontribs) 20:30, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

@Bubblesorg: The reason is because several other editors thought that a separate article was unnecessary, so all of the content of the article can now be found at Spinosauridae#‎Localities. You can see their full reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian Spinosaurid, but what it comes down to is notability. There does not seem to be enough information available about the subject in reliable sources to warrant a standalone article. Mz7 (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

18:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

2nd opinion on

After this second unblock request which appeared to be more trolling, I revoked talk page access for this account to avoid any further wasting of time. Premature? OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ohnoitsjamie: I don't have any loud objections to revoking TPA expeditiously in this case. I also got the sense that we were getting trolled here, and reading over their most recent unblock request, it seems clear that at the very least, they still do not actually understand why their edits were problematic: Thank you for ... showing me how honest indictments may be construed as vandalism in order to protect a hoax with popular support and funding that may deem it authentic. The one thing that I don't quite agree with is protecting the talk page. Since TPA for the account has already been revoked, that should be enough to stop them from editing the talk page. If the user uses IPs or alternative accounts to evade the block to edit the talk page, then we could consider semi-protection then, but until that happens, I don't think protection is necessary per WP:PP#User talk pages. Mz7 (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Good point...I had a brief mental lapse and forget how to revoke TPA via the block link. Thanks for fixing that. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:08, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
hi i'm new but i want to be friends will you be my friend. Donaldnemyer455 (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

CVU Training

Hello. I would like to get trained to be in the Counter-Vandalism Unit. Can you help me? I see that you have no open slots, but could I be next in line or something? EDG 543 (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi EDG 543. Unfortunately, I will be rather busy with real-life work over the next two weeks. I should be able to take you on starting around May 9. How does that sound? Mz7 (talk) 23:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7:I think that will work. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EDG 543 (talkcontribs) 15:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Educate Me Please

Pllease make me your student for the Counter-Vandalism training program — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swaraj Sagar Pradhan (talkcontribs) 05:38, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Swaraj Sagar Pradhan: As I told EDG 543 earlier today, I am currently busy in real life and will be unable to start training you until May 9. Is that okay? Mz7 (talk) 07:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: sure ! May 9 would be just perfect — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swaraj Sagar Pradhan (talkcontribs) 07:41, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

FYI

~S.Brendan.S~ (talk · contribs) is evading their block on 72.198.182.107 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). From the looks of things, they clearly do not have the competence to edit productively here and I don't see that this kind of behavior from them will ever change. Would you consider modifying their block to indefinite per WP:NOTHERE and WP:CIR? Thanks. (long-term, experienced IP editor) 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:596C:872C:BA3E:F030 (talk) 23:41, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Mz7 (talk) 00:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

CVU Training

I would like to have some counter vandalism training. Afootpluto (talk) 20:15, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

@Afootpluto: A few other editors have asked me this over the past few days, and unfortunately, I'm a bit busy in real life at the moment. If no other trainer is available, I would be willing to take you on in mid-May – is that okay? Mz7 (talk) 05:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
@Afootpluto: Hello! I'm a new instructor, and am willing to take you on as a student if you're willing. Please contact me on my talk page if you accept. Vermont (talk) 00:57, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help to edit Dubai Properties Group

Dubai Properties would like to change the title of their page from Dubai Properties Group to Dubai Properties - can you help please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iprospectmena (talkcontribs) 11:31, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@Iprospectmena: I'm not familiar with the subject of the article, but looking at the company's website, it seems "Dubai Properties Group" still exists as a parent entity to "Dubai Properties". If the article was originally about "Dubai Properties Group", shouldn't it stay about Dubai Properties Group? On a different note, regarding your affiliation with Dubai Properties, please read our conflict of interest guidelines to ensure that you do not inadvertently breach our policies here. Thank you. Mz7 (talk) 18:01, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response Mz7. I am currently working with Dubai Properties as their Digital Media Agency and they have tasked me with making the updates on their behalf. Okay, question for you. Dubai Properties Group is still showing on their website (for now) we will most probably close this page later on but can you help me with something else? 'Dubai Properties' had their own WikiPedia page but someone merged/deleted the page in 2013 with the Dubai Properties Group Page. Is there a way I can bring the Dubai Properties page back and/or un-merge it? They need this back, my plan was just to amend the Dubai Properties Group page but if we can bring their old page back that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iprospectmena (talkcontribs) 10:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ipropsectmena: Prior to the merge, the article looked like this. It appears the entire text of the article was simply transplanted in what we currently see as the "Dubai Properties" section at Dubai Properties Group. It looks like around 5 years ago, I closed a discussion that resulted in this merge. It's been so long, I did not even remember. Reading over the discussion, it seems the agreement between two editors was that it was unnecessary for a "Dubai Properties" article to exist in addition to a "Dubai Properties Group" article.
One thing that I think you should keep in mind is that the editor community here is generally leery about companies who try to edit their own articles, because oftentimes they end up adding content that is inadvertently too promotional. If "Dubai Properties Group" is changing into "Dubai Properties" again, we should look at reliable sources (e.g. independent reputable news coverage) to see whether the change is reflected in their coverage as well. We don't necessarily always follow the direction of the organization if reliable sources don't follow suit (e.g. Swaziland recently changed their official name to "eSwatini", but editors have agreed not to change the title of the Wikipedia article). If you think most reliable sources use "Dubai Properties" instead of "Dubai Properties Group", then we could start a requested move discussion to get feedback from other editors about it. Mz7 (talk) 19:35, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

16:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed ChochopkCoffeeGryffindorJimpKnowledge SeekerLankiveilPeridonRjd0060

Guideline and policy news

  • The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
  • A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

  • AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
  • When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
  • The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
  • There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

Precious four years!

Precious
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:56, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations! --TheSandDoctor Talk 18:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Email

Hi Mz7, please check your email when you get the chance. Thanks, TheSandDoctor Talk 18:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Romanian airports

Hi, I'm wondering if you could perhaps advise on an irritating situation. There's an IP editor, who usually goes by the name of 82.40.206.32, and his single purpose here is to add the Hungarian-language names of various Romanian airports to their infoboxes, as "native names".

Here is an example of what I mean. And it's absurd: for one, ethnic Hungarians are under 2% of the population in the city served by the airport. For another, the airport was established in 1943, a full 25 years after the area was no longer part of the Kingdom of Hungary, so it has never been under Hungarian administration. Finally, there is, as far as I can tell, no provision under Romanian law for referring to airports by any name other than in Romanian.

Anyway, is there any long-term solution to this issue, rather than me endlessly having to revert whenever 82.40.206.32 decides to add in another round of "native names"? Thank you for your help. - Biruitorul Talk 13:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Biruitorul: Ah yeah, edit warring is not an optimal solution. Generally, the solution is to stop reverting and start a discussion with the user and try to form a consensus (the argument that you just gave me – have you told it to the IP yet?), but what will probably be better in this case is to start the discussion at a centralized place to get outside input, such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Romania or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation, inviting the IP editor to the discussion. Once it is clear that a consensus exists for either one of your positions, even if it is something like two editors against one, then it is much easier for an administrator to justify something like a block. As it stands, without a clear consensus, it would be hard for me to block for disruption because that would look like me taking a side in the debate and using admin tools to enforce my personal views – a violation of WP:INVOLVED. On the other hand, if there were a consensus, it would be easier for me to block because I could say that an editor was "editing against consensus". Mz7 (talk) 16:46, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, after some days of going back and forth on this issue, 82.40.206.32 and I seem to have agreed on all the airports but one. Specifically, it looks like we're going by Romanian legislation, only including the Hungarian name for the three airports located in cities where ethnic Hungarians exceed 20% of the population.
However, we've hit an impasse for Cluj International Airport (the city it serves and the county that operates it both being around 16% Hungarian). On that page, his revert-warring continues, and he's compared me to a Nazi. I'm not sure where to go from here. - Biruitorul Talk 14:30, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@Biruitorul: I have left a warning on the user talk page, and in hindsight, I should have left this kind of warning earlier, when you first brought my attention to the issue, so that the editor is aware of the edit warring policy. For that, I apologize. I have also fully protected the article Cluj International Airport temporarily. In the meantime, it may be helpful to seek outside input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Romania or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation, as I mentioned earlier (neutrally worded notification (e.g. "please take a look at this discussion") is not inappropriate per WP:Canvassing). If the user continues to persistently revert or personally attack you, I have warned them that they may be blocked. I hope this helps. Mz7 (talk) 19:42, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

16:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Janindu mahesh article

Can you unblock that page to edit. I can't edit that page because of someone had been block it. Therefore please unblock it.. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.250.242.108 (talk) 03:07, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done. The page is protected against creation for a reason: each time it has been created, it has failed to credibly indicate the importance of its subject. I suggest you find another topic to write about. Furthermore, if you have ever been blocked from editing Wikipedia on an account here (e.g. you are related to any of the accounts listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Divyanka Babu/Archive), you are simply not allowed to edit, so any page that you submit here may be deleted for no reason other than the fact that a blocked/banned user created it. Mz7 (talk) 03:27, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

:(

u no like ruski? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.241.250.129 (talk) 01:44, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

To the contrary, I think the Kamchatka brown bear is indeed a glorious bear. But it's not appropriate for us to write that in a Wikipedia article. Mz7 (talk) 01:47, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

My Apologies.

You are right. My actions against Boisityourselfdown were inexcusable. It just angered me so to see his craven vandalizations against an important discussion on a website with millions of dedicated users working to make it an excellent factual resource. People like him don't help, but still, I stooped to his level, and for that I will and must face any disciplinary action that comes as a result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delfadoriscool (talkcontribs) 18:33, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

@Delfadoriscool: It's all good as long as you promise not to do it again. The only consequence is a warning. Given Wikipedia's nature, vandalism occurs on articles many times every day; one of the things some Wikipedia editors do as maintenance is patrol the list of recent changes at Special:RecentChanges and revert edits they identify as vandalism. We even have special tools that assist in this task, the most popular being Twinkle. We would be glad to have you on board, and you could learn more about it at WP:CVUA. Mz7 (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your forgiveness. I shall strive to be a better Wikipedian in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delfadoriscool (talkcontribs) 01:12, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Zlatko Hasanbegovic

Hello. Just because he is Bosniak declaring himself as Croat does not mean he shouldn't belong to category "Bosniaks of Croatia". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.156.130.24 (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Link to the category for editor convenience: Category:Bosniaks of Croatia --TheSandDoctor Talk 15:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

I was forbidden to edit his page. I can't add that category to his page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.156.130.24 (talk) 18:49, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Mz7 Hasanbegovic was born in Bosnia to Bosniak parents. His mother for example is from a place where there were almost no Croats. In Croatia he is a member of several Bosniak organizations. Beacause of influences of Ante Starcevic and WW2 (need to know Croatian history) he declares as Croat. He can be whatever he wants, but nothing can change the fact he is Bosniak who declares as Croat. Please add that "category" and don't allow Tzowu to edit the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.156.130.24 (talk) 18:58, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

I protected the page because of an ongoing edit war. On Wikipedia, repeatedly reversing each other's edits due to a disagreement is generally seen as disruptive to the normal editorial process. Instead of repeatedly reversing, you need to discuss the changes you want to be made with the editors involved in the disagreement. I personally do not have any opinion on this issue; instead, you should explain your reasoning at Talk:Zlatko Hasanbegović#Categories, where another editor, Tzowu, has explained their reasoning for why they are against adding the category to the article. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 01:04, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
There, I have also explained why I am for adding the category to the article. Thanks! --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.38.145.105 (talkcontribs) 10:31, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
So, when will I be able to edit his page now that I have explained why that category should be added? --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.156.155.236 (talkcontribs) 13:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
You will not be allowed to insert the category into the article unless and until a consensus exists among editors to add the category. As long as there is disagreement, the article must remain in the state it was before the disagreement – in this case, without the category. Mz7 (talk) 17:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Mz7. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:26, 12 May 2018 (UTC). 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.

Thanks TheSandDoctor Talk 15:26, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: I've sent a reply. Will keep an eye on the issue in the meantime. Mz7 (talk) 01:11, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping and the response. I have replied in turn. To the latter (in your comment): Thanks. --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:41, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your consistent efforts to reverse vandalism on Wikipedia. It's deeply appreciated. Thank you! Ira Leviton (talk) 23:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
@Ira Leviton: Thank you for the barnstar! Mz7 (talk) 04:14, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection is needed here once again, probably for a much longer duration this time. Please also block 107.77.165.7 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) as a sock of Luis22pdxedu (talk · contribs). Thank you. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:146C:DA12:C141:A784 (talk) 22:14, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done. Mz7 (talk) 04:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism and adding relevant content to page: TVS Apache

Dear Sir,

I have already posted a reply to the discussion section of the the page: [69] and I request you to make the necessary changes and/or to allow me to edit the page. I really would love to contribute to this page, revert vandalism and make it better. Thank you. --Icestorm6 (talk) 06:35, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

22:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking Qwerty69696969 (talk · contribs) but they are back with Donna1738 (talk · contribs). Would you mind blocking them and protecting the page? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:23, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt:  Done + DeputyHead1738 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki). Thanks for the heads up. Mz7 (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

FYI about recent revert

Isn't the first time... --JustBerry (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

@JustBerry: I see it, thanks. I've left a more targeted warning on the user talk page, and if they don't respond to that, I'll block. Mz7 (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@Mz7: Sure. Another revert. --JustBerry (talk) 16:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 Done. Mz7 (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for protecting Robert S. Katz but the IPs seem to be relentless. Is there any way a range block can be placed on them? The only edits to the page since the protection have been to revert vandalism. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Never mind, it seems Drmies is taking care of it. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I saw that I made the same rangeblock Mz7 made earlier, except that I made it a year long. Drmies (talk) 04:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Duscusion about new artical creation

Hi Dear, I want create new artical which releted you have deleted previously Krina (film), you have deleted the title the lake of evidence and proof. But now it have so popular on internet and full of evidence, about to release indian cinema on 8 June 2018 so i think starting creation about this title, This title is not related to me any angle i am only say based on its popularity and i found internet its have no Wikipedia so i tell. Ritesh the king (talk) 07:10, 19 May 2018 (UTC)


If you allow to me i will get more skill develop of contributions of articles creation,it would get experience growth to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritesh the king (talkcontribs) 07:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ritesh the king: Have you ever edited Wikipedia using any other accounts besides "Ritesh the king"? Mz7 (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

No dear i have not use any other account beside Ritesh the king but i have learnt mostly every thing about wikipedia creation throw IP address creation non account edit, now i am experienced for artical creation. Ritesh the king (talk) 07:55, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ritesh the king: Krina (film) was deleted because a consensus of editors determined that the subject is not notable enough for Wikipedia: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krina (film). Please find some other topic to write about. Mz7 (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding this

The discussion was closed before I could reply, but your comment is worth replying. First the sentence I quoted actually has anything to do with what you said, above all what I quoted is preamble to wait you quoted which is in bulleted list. I don't know why you claim they are not related at all. Second, yes I agree with you I did generalized "Vice Chancellor" post in my reply, and this was done subconsciously due to my background. I do try to learn and adapt to international nuances and subtleties when speaking/writing but sometimes one cannot help. So actually my usage of VC in that context is only meant for those who are holding it as the highest position, not anything else. I hope I clarify myself. Thanks. –Ammarpad (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: I was just confused why you quoted that passage. Of course meeting any one of the PROF criteria would result in notability, and nothing in my comment indicated I did not know this. Mz7 (talk) 14:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Final Exam!

Hi Mz7,

My final exam is completed. Waiting for your response. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 16:38, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Siddiqsazzad001. I'll probably get it reviewed on Monday. I've got a commitment that takes up most of my time Saturday and Sunday, unfortunately. Mz7 (talk) 03:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Yanny or Laurel

The article, which you decided to keep has been nominated for a merger with Internet Phenomena less than 10 hours after the deletion discussion closed by the same person who nominated it for deletion, which may be considered forum-shopping. Five people in the discussion opposed merging the article and 2 people (three if you count the submitter) wanted to merge it. It seems as if the people trying to delete the article are so desperate towards doing so, that they have to go as far as to possibly forum shopping. What i'm trying to say is that the majority of people want to keep the article, not merge or redirect or delete it and that nominating the article for a merger less than half a day after the deletion discussion closed is considered forum-shopping, then close the discussion immediately. We don't want a deletion and/or merger war to happen because of this article being considered "Non-notable" by some. 344917661X (talk) 19 May 2018

@344917661X: I've closed the new merge discussion. Mz7 (talk) 03:37, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

17:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Bay Area WikiSalon invitation!

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
A Wikipedia panel discussion about journalism

Periodically, on the last Wednesday evening of the month, wiki enthusiasts gather at Bay Area WikiSalon to munch, mingle, and learn about new projects and ideas.

We allow time for announcements, informal conversation and working on articles. Newcomers and experienced wiki users are encouraged to attend. Bring a friend! Free Wi-Fi is available so bring your editing devices. This months focus is images!

We will have beverages (including beer and wine) plus light snacks (maybe pizza too!).


For further details and to RSVP, please see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, May 2018 (note: we are meeting at the new WMF HQ at 120 Kearny Street!)

See you soon! Ben Creasy, Nikikana, Stephen, and Wayne | (Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice here) | MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

In my defense

FYI: The removal of sourced content did seem and look and feel very much like vandalism to me. I don't bring IPs willy-nilly to AIV. [72] Just saying. -- ψλ 13:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello Mz7, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

  • WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

  • Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

  • A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. 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.

Editathons

  • There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

  • Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, 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. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

  • The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

  • Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
  • The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

UPDATE! Bay Area WikiSalon moved to June 6!

Please join us in downtown San Francisco!
A Wikipedia panel discussion about journalism

Our apologies, but we are rescheduling to Wednesday, June 6 at 6:00 p.m. due to a WMF host scheduling conflict.


For further details and to RSVP, please see: Wikipedia:Bay Area WikiSalon, June 2018 (note: we are meeting at the new WMF HQ at 120 Kearny Street!)

See you soon! Niki, Ben, Stephen, and Wayne | (Subscribe/Unsubscribe to this talk page notice here) | MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Mz7, it seems like you're AFK on IRC. Are you able to hop on by any chance? Thanks, JustBerry (talk) 05:33, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Responded. Mz7 (talk) 05:55, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

New essay idea

I had an idea for an essay earlier today, and I typed it out here: Wikipedia:Dealing with stress. To my talk page watchers, let me know if it's dumb, and feel free to add your own tips if you feel there's something I left out. Ultimately, I think this is targeted at editors who have been here for a while, but are just starting to branch out into some of the more confrontational areas of the project, such as ANI or controversial topic areas. It's also targeted at editors who feel so discouraged by the stress involved with participating here that they are considering leaving Wikipedia completely. The advice in the essay is probably things that most of us have heard a million times, and a lot of it is probably naive, but these are the words that I live by as I continue editing here, and I guess I wanted to share it with others. Mz7 (talk) 21:08, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

C-V Training

Sir,

I see you have an available Student Slot Open for Counter-Vandalism training.

This is a cause I could see myself contributing to in the long term. I have a very strong technical background, I am a long time user of Wikipedia, and this seems like a great way to give back.

If you're willing, I would ask that you train me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Z3a1 (talkcontribs) 16:42, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Z3a1, welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed that you haven't edited Wikipedia using this account before. The course is designed for users with at least some amount of editing experience, so I would recommend that you spend some time and edit some articles yourself before taking this course. You can find more information about contributing at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia. Mz7 (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

12:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Seeking advice on a few articles!

(P.S. I stopped by because I saw you were doing some cleanup work here and there.) Thanks, JustBerry (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Continued: What do you think about this userpage? --JustBerry (talk) 18:22, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

@JustBerry: OK, I've deleted Draft:Celebrity Authentics and blocked the account for username violation. I've revision deleted the Molex edit you linked. I've blanked User talk:Masoudyous1723. We're generally fairly lenient on what users can have in their user sandboxes, since it is just a testing space for editing. Unless there is clear hate speech, I'm inclined to leave the other two alone. I would also leave Kh saeed lone's user page alone too. Doesn't seem too unrelated since it's currently just a user box (we allow a limited amount of autobiographical content on user pages, as long as it doesn't become a WP:FAKEARTICLE), though a note about the purpose of user pages might not hurt. Mz7 (talk) 18:29, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
I added Template:courtesy blank to User talk:Masoudyous1723. Left the sandboxes alone. I put a quick message on Kh saeed lone's talk page. Thanks, Mz7! Regards, JustBerry (talk) 18:38, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Another one...

Deeny Dakota Consiglio (the userpage itself) --JustBerry (talk) 00:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

@JustBerry: I’ve tagged it with {{db-g11}}. Will let another admin confirm. Mz7 (talk) 07:40, 30 May 2018 (UTC)