User talk:NoonIcarus/Archive 5

saludos

hola, jamez, y si estas en Venezuela, tenias cuidado. buena suerte Kingsif (talk) 00:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: Muchas gracias. Hace meses salí del país, estaré pendiente de quienes están allá. Seguiré de cerca las noticias. ¡Saludos! --Jamez42 (talk) 09:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Muy bien! pues, ya siento pa tu pais y espera pa todas.

Ah, esta como sacar la foto de Ledezma? Kingsif (talk) 09:39, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Correcto, actualmente Ledezma se encuentra fuera del país. --Jamez42 (talk) 09:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

pues - mas seguro! ay, como las otras, es triste mostrar unas de las mentes mejores salir a sus pais. espero que puedes volver alli, si tu quieres, pronto :) Kingsif (talk) 09:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: Muchas gracias nuevamente :( Ya han sido muchos los amigos que he visto irse del país y ahora me ha tocado a mí. Lo mejor que puedo hacer por los momentos es tener paciencia, pero también ser optimista. Realmente sí espero que la situación mejore. --Jamez42 (talk) 10:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

siento pa esta situacion, estas con tu amigos ahora? y... ser optimista es fantastico, superarás mucho con la positividad de tu lado! Kingsif (talk) 10:10, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: Tengo a varios amigos en la ciudad donde estoy y a algunos familiares; de hecho planeamos participar en la protesta de hoy, que también está siendo planeada a nivel internacional. --Jamez42 (talk) 10:12, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

ojala tengas mucho exito! no creo hay protestas aqui, pero estoy contigo en mi alma Kingsif (talk) 10:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

February 2019 at Women in Red

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111 Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. February events: Social Workers Black Women February geofocus: Ancient World Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage: Socialites Twitter - Forgotten African American Suffragists Women in Red image uploads to Commons Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0) Subscription options: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Nice

... work at SPI! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:25, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Thanks! Apollo has been editing in Venezuelan articles for quite some time now, as well as evading blocks. It's helpful to be familiar with their edit behavior and to see things with a grain of salt. I'll let you know about any other news. Cheers! --Jamez42 (talk) 01:08, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

I have been away from Venezuelan articles for at least five years, so I don't know the current socks or POV pushers. And after this, I will go away again :) Even before we knew he had cancer, I said Chavez would be dead before Wikipedia had a neutral article on him. I was right! The willfully blind continue to push their POV into those articles something awful. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:20, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I have only been helping out in the English Wikipedia for some months now; it's sad to know you'll be leaving soon, but I believe that everyone here should edit when they like. As of the current sockmasters, I think Apollo is the main one, if not the only one worthy of mention. --Jamez42 (talk) 01:26, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis

how the hell is it not neutral point of view. it is, it is also giving balance to the page, plus its giving new information.KingTintin (talk) 02:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE--Jamez42 (talk) 13:24, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

@KingTintin: Three users now have disputed the edit, including outdated information and unreliable sources. This has been explained in edit summaries and in the talk page of the article. I suggest you to explain your arguments there, as other users have. Thanks in advance. --Jamez42 (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Crisis in Venezuela

Hi Jamez42 - I chose to delete the word "autocratic" with regard to the Venezuelan government because its inclusion is, itself, a non-neutral value-laden word. I find it surprising that you feel that to include the word is "neutral"; the inclusion of the word implies that it is a proven fact that the government is autocratic despite reliable sources arguing differently. For instance the report of the UN International Accompaniment Mission states that the 2018 elections were free and fair, and the UN Human Rights Council report states that, whilst there have been some failures made by the Venezuelan government, the true cause of the current crisis lies with the international community's sanctions. Other observers have also backed up these arguments including human rights lawyer Daniel Kovalik of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and UK Labour MP Chris Williamson. It is, of course, a contested argument - but the very fact that there is a reliable body of sources who don't believe the Venezuelan government is autocratic makes its inclusion without qualification a non-neutral point of view. The truly neutral approach here is to remove the word entirely or to say that "X describes the government of Venezuela as autocratic". US President Donald Trump has stated that he will confront the Maduro government - the inclusion of the word "autocratic" is not necessary to make the point. ColeHine (talk) 11:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

The word is neutral because it is proven that Maduro's governemnt is autocratic. I wasn't thinking about the elections at first, but I would gladly reply: the United Nations didn't participate in the process, as stated in a letter sent to government officials; I don't know which document you provided, but it clearly doesn't belong to the UN and it seems to have been published by Venezuelanalysis. The government illegalized the most voted coalition in the democratic history of Venezuela, barred nearly all opposition candidates from participating and there were plenty of irregularities before the election, such as irregularities of the electoral schedule, the lack of the Constituent Assembly's competencies to summon the elections and the lack of time for standard electoral functions. There were also irregularities during the election, such as vote buying and voter intimidation, and the government refused to update the Electoral Registry. This meant that if now you were old enough to vote or you moved to, let’s say, Los Angeles from New York, you wouldn’t have been able to vote or you would have had to move to your hometown to cast your vote. Of course, because all of this the elections resulted in the lowest turnout rate of Venezuela's democratic history. These aren’t free elections.

There is also no division of powers, since all of the government branches are controlled by the ruling party except of the National Assembly, which has been effectively neutralized by the Supreme Tribunal, which in turn was named by a lame duck Assembly and is composed of justices that do not even meet the requirements to hold office. On top of that, the opposition legislative body was countered by a parallel Assembly. :There is no judicial independence; over 90% of the judges are provisional, which means they can be dismissed at any time by the executive branch at any moment.

We can also talk about civil liberties. Freedom of the press has been growingly curtailed, just like the freedom of expression and of protest. Venezuela currently has more than 2.500 websites blockes. There have been more than 12000 arbitrary detentions, even when the government controlled justice decides the release of the detainees, as well as tortures. The CASLA Institute documented more than 300 cases of torture only during the 2017 protests, including sexual torture. Wuilly Arteaga, one of the detainees tortured, even mentioned that another girl imprisoned along him was raped on top of him. These tortures are so shameless that they even are reported in whatever national media is remaining. This was further confirmed by Human Rights Watch and the Venezuela NGO Foro Penal, which published a report about the following year, explaining tortures to military members. The Independent Expert Board of the OAS determined that crimes against humanity have been commited during Maduro's presidency.

International sanctions doesn't have anything to do if Venezuela is an autocracy or not, but if you mean the current crisis was caused by some, Venezuela has experienced five years of economic recession before any sanctions were imposed, and most are individual sanctions about corrupt officials and those that have violated human rights. You could try reading about Bladimir Lugo. It's interesting that you quote Alfred de Zayas, who is now only a UN official formerly, and he was criticized in one of the last audiences of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights for refusing to recognize the humanitarian crisis because when he visited the country he only took pictures of the charcuterie in front of his hotel. His declarations also directly contradict the last report of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. "On 20 March and 23 April 2018, OHCHR sent letters to the Permanent Mission of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in Geneva transmitting requests for specific information to the Venezuelan authorities, including on the consequences of the sanctions imposed on the country. On 2 May, in a reply to the letters dated 8 and 20 March, the Permanent Mission of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela questioned whether the High Commissioner held the mandate to issue a public report."; "While it is necessary to assess the impact of economic sanctions on the capacity of the Government to fulfil its human rights obligations in more detail, information gathered indicates that the socioeconomic crisis had been unfolding for several years prior to the imposition of these sanctions."

Best regards, --Jamez42 (talk) 13:21, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

References

Your e-mail

I don't reply to user e-mail. I don't think it's necessary in the case of ATL to present evidence by e-mail. I see no harm in doing it "publicly". It's the very rare case where private evidence is needed.

LTA pages are tricky. They are hard to prepare and often don't reveal anything that isn't already known. They also often contain inaccuracies that are misleading to other users. OTOH, I personally have found a few LTA pages to be useful, so I suppose I have no strong recommendation one way or the other. If you really want to create one, you could try it in draft space first and then ask knowledgeable editors to review it and give you feedback.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:39, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Thank you! --Jamez42 (talk) 14:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bbb23: and James, I recommend against LTA pages, as they tend to "glorify" the sock, along with giving them a roadmap to everything you know about them, so that they can adjust to avoid detection. I follow a prolific sockmaster who in turn closely follows me, and who has demonstrated the ability to adjust her editing patterns based on information on her LTA page, so it was recommended to me that I no longer catalogue her editing behaviors. (I am happy to report this change in approach has resulted in a good outcome, in terms of her current editing, which continues but has not been disruptive for several years now.) So my vote is for no LTA page in most cases. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:19, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

What's the name of the sock again ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:23, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Apollo The Logician --Jamez42 (talk) 13:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

I have given Diplomat their first warning. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:55, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Diplomat592 SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:54, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

March 2019 at Women in Red

		March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113 Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: March: Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen Geofocus: Francophone Women Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman
		Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

El Junquito raid

Hello, I have responded to your revert notification on the talk page about El Junquito raid, since I would prefer more people to see the exchange. My position is, of course, that your revert is "less than neutral", to put it extremely mildly, and not my edits.--82.137.111.223 (talk) 18:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@82.137.111.223: Hi. Thank you for giving explanation in the talk page. I will read them briefly. --Jamez42 (talk) 23:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Concierto

Estoy agotada! Puedes hacerme el favor de dar un repaso por el articulo del concierto, para ver que barbaridades he cometido? Esta semi-protegido por ahora, que se puede trabajar sin vandalizaciones. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Recién terminando de revisarlo, tengo que felicitarte junto a quienes te han ayudado a ofrecer tantos detalles para el artículo, está excelente; tan solo hice unos pocos cambios y continuaré vigilándolo, pero estoy muy satisfecho. Creo que no hay problemas importantes por el momento, y la cuestión sobre el orden alfabético puede decidirse el día del evento. ¡Un fuerte abrazo! --Jamez42 (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Si logramas unas 200 palabras mas, Kingsif lo puede meter como DYK ... falta un dia mas para poderlo entrar. A-Go-Tada! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:59, 21 February 2019 (UTC)4

@SandyGeorgia: Ohh, el pequeño gran detalle. Manos a la obra, así será :) --Jamez42 (talk) 02:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

hmmm ... cosa rara ... acabo de ver que Kingsif tiene cuatro dias sin editar :( Yo no soy aficionado de DYK ... tu lo has hecho antes? Quizas ZiaLater lo mete? Yo no! Disculpa la falta de diacriticos en mi teclado, que estoy cansada ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:12, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Sin pena jajaja. Yo creo haberlo hecho una sola vez; tampoco soy fanático y tengo el temor de que la nominación no pase, pero es mejor que no intertarlo. Podríamos discutir el fact más adelante. --Jamez42 (talk) 02:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

James, I was totally wrong-- it is not 1,500 words, it is 1,500 characters, and we are way beyond that. It can go to DYK now. But I don't do DYK. They hate me and I don't like them. So, either you, or Zia or Kingsif can do it. Since we missed the key date (22 Feb), no hurry, but it has to be submitted by tomorrow I think. It has to be submitted within 7 days of creation, so we are getting close. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:19, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

I understood it would be 200 words, so it should be alright. I'll see if I can look through new material. --Jamez42 (talk) 02:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Con la adición de la sección de Background, creo que todo debería estar bien. --Jamez42 (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes! But I trimmed that, and then rearranged everything for better flow from that. I like it! Thanks, James, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, darn it, if Kingsif doesn't show up by tomorrow, one of us has to submit it to DYK (seven days is up on 22 Feb). I think the hook should be ... more than thirty performers from seven countries joined in a benefit concert, Venezuela Aid Live, to support humanitarian aid for Venezuela. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Sounds good enough. --Jamez42 (talk) 04:09, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi, sorry guys, I’ve been busy - I’ll submit it to DYK if you haven’t already? Kingsif (talk) 13:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

It may be too late? And I am no longer convinced it is a good idea ... I am working round the clock today just to keep articles up to date, not sure dealing with DYK is a good use of time? Up to you if you want to do it ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:49, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

PS, if you want to do it, there are some REALLY intriguing hooks that can be generated from the Maduro response section ... state-run TV says 150 musicians, but sources say only one confirmed musician. And so on ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:50, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Current issues

• Can anyone figure out if Franco de Vita is in? Conflicting information ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• Should it become necessary, I have parked the RFPP text at User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox. So far it is manageable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:02, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Hi! I will be busy in the following hours, about four or five :( However, I did a quick search for references and all the sources that I found state that de Vita won't participate.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] It seems that he was supposed to take care of the closure of the concert and that he announced that he wouldn't participate on Instagram. --Jamez42 (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I also visited the official website and de Vita isn't among the artists. --Jamez42 (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Tense

Fiddlestick, Jamez42, the concert is almost over, and most of this is already past tense even though there is a bit of concert left. Could we revert this and live with the rest for an hour? A whole lot of that text is more correctly past tense now that the concert is underway. I don't want to keep improving the article if I will later have to go back and catch every one of those ;( I think we're covered by the very first instance of "is" ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

For example, it's OK already to say "was organized" and "was funded" and many things like that -- those parts are done so I didn't want to leave it half-and-half and wanted to move forward on other things. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:03, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Reading through it, it's true what you say. What matters most to me is the template of current event, but I saw that there are other sentences that are fine saying "was". Best wishes :) --Jamez42 (talk) 21:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Aid situation

James, I see you are updating the aid situation ... could you also review the Background section at VAL? Venezuela Aid Live#Background SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I was browsing through my watchlist and new editions, although I just made some edits to the section. Cheers! --Jamez42 (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

edit conflict

James i'm trying to expand article and jsut got a huge edit conflict with you ... give me some time to finish? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I'm terribly sorry :( I was afraid that would happen, but sensing there wasn't much activity I decided to make the edit. So far I'm writing in the talk page. Best wishes! --Jamez42 (talk) 21:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Yo soy tan llorana cuando me da un edit conflict :) Me discuplas ! I am done now, and tired-- have at it! Saludos, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Jajajaja no worries, take care! --Jamez42 (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Re-phrasing

Thanks! I am not good at paraphrasing, so I tend to overquote. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:52, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

IN USE again

James ! Please avoid editing while Power enwiki has article in use-- doing so creates miserable edit conflict! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Ohhhhh I am soo sorry!! I just noticed the template! :( In the future I'll take care that there's any in place first. --Jamez42 (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for this, James; I am going to wait a few hours to see if Migracion Colombia puts out a new number. Otherwise, I would have to reword the whole template to attribute the info to intelligence sources via Infobae, and it could be too wordy. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk)

@SandyGeorgia: Always welcome :) I added the reference as a comment for the same reason, and sometimes is better to be accurate rather than quick. --Jamez42 (talk) 15:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

You really should examine your biases

I strongly suggest you stop editing Venezuela articles for a while and look at other parts of how the encyclopedia function. Your edits do introduce a systemic anti-Maduro bias into literally every article you touch. The IPs edits were violations of WP:NPOV I'm not disputing that. But they were replacing equally egregious WP:WEASEL language which you restored. Rather than edit warring to keep articles anti-Maduro I suggest you take a look at WP:YESPOV, stop trying to get leftist sources declared "unreliable" and consider editing in areas of the encyclopedia that you don't have such an obvious and stark POV.

Now I'll note that I also have strong opinions on Venezuela. That's why I rarely edit except to remove explicit vandalism and otherwise maintain a light touch. I suggest you should do the same. Simonm223 (talk) 13:49, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Simonm223: I have to admit I find this message a little aggressive and even threatening. I feel there was no need to bring this to my talk page, and I really hope there aren't any hard feelings regarding my previous edits.

That being said, there are many things to address: just like I have argued with the sources that I have provided, adding content about Venezuela's human rights abuses, abuse of power and economic crisis does not mean being "anti-Maduro". I, too, admit that I have strong opinions about Venezuela, but I do my best to follow the guidelines of the encyclopedia. I encourage you to take a deeper look into my edits if you want to and look into the contributions I've made (for instance, these are the links of the main last ones: [8][9]). I also invite you to provide your insight in the open discussion in the talk pages. When it's fit, I also try to correct inaccuracies, if there are any.

Despite everything, I thank you for the suggestion based on policy. However, I think you have a wrong impression of me and in case we encounter one another again in another article, I will clarify that I will not stop editing in current Venezuelan politics, specially at this moment where bilingual editors are needed, mostly because you haven't provided any hard arguments or evidence on how I am violating Wikipedia's policies. I'm not convinced that removing unreferenced content or contesting sources whose last discussions in the reliable sources noticeboard have a consensus of being unreliable are. If you want to address a specific pattern, issue or can/want to provide diffs regarding this, be my guest, since I'll be willing to change any behaviour that goes against policy. For the time being, though, this does not seem to be the case.

Just like you have invited me to read WP:YESPOV, I invited you likewise to read WP:AGF and WP:CIV. If there are any questions or matters left you would like to discuss, preferably in an article's talk page and in a more amicable tone, I'd be pleased to answer.

Best regards. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:02, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hugo Chávez; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Hi. I understand the reason of the message, but I only wanted to mention that I think it was a little too much severity. After my second revert, I pinged the IP in the talk page to start a discussion regarding the recent changes and explained in another section the policies I based my reverts on. I notified them on their talk page as well, but I received no response, which is why I reverted again. The IP blanked their talk page, in which they already had nine warnings for different reasons, and reverted again without providing an explaination or an edit summary, which is why I filed a report on the ANI. In any case I still thank you for the warning and in the future I will take care with my edits in the article. Best wishes. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

It's frustrating to deal with IP editors who restore challenged edits, but you still have to watch out for edit warring. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Disruptive behaviour

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. BeŻet (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@BeŻet:, do you have a diff for this "disruptive behavior"? Also, have you read WP:DTTR? It would be more expedient to point out where this alleged behavior is occurring in plain English. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Article

Just became aware of Electricity sector in Venezuela; looking at its editing history, probably needs close checking. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:32, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

It seems like the electricity issue in Venezuela is a mess, a discussion probably needs to be opened about it. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2019 Venezuelan blackout

On 14 March 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2019 Venezuelan blackout, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@Stephen: Wow, I wasn't expecting this to get posted. Thank you! --Jamez42 (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello NoonIcarus,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117 Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: Gender studies / United Nations / Dance Geofocus: Portuguese-speakers Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

File:Simón 2018 film.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 17:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Buenas Dias

Muchas Gracias

Jamez, I was informed by an observer that the best route to guarantee peace in Venezuela is if both parties can come together, work together on having a new election, do not run in said election, guarantee those who do run will not be an issue for either party (all candidates have a valid birth certificate and no ties to a country with suspicious ties to the country such as Russia or the United States), and just let a new person get elected. Venezuela is suppose to be a democracy, no? Then let the people decide who should lead them. Guaido is only a temporary head of state and Maduro thinks his democracy rests solely on his shoulders. That is not a democracy. So let the people decide, just not have either person run for the office. Venezuela has a ton of people who could run for the position, which is the whole point of a democracy. Prince of Catalonia (talk) 22:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@Prince of Catalonia: Cheers, mate. --Jamez42 (talk) 14:09, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Great Patriotic Poll

I think restoring this title in various articles is kinda weird unless you also revert the name-change of the linked article, a motion i would support! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 12:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I think that I proposal should be started regarding the move. There's currently an ongoing discussion in the main article's main page. --Jamez42 (talk) 13:55, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

I put in a request at technical moves. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:55, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

es.wiki sanctions chart

Jamez, something is still wrong over at the Spanish Wiki on the sanctions chart. The Swiss did not sanction Jaua ... they sanctioned seven people, and the chart has nine. If you could make that chart sortable, it would be easier to check (I don't know how to make sortable in Spanish wiki). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

May you join this month's editathons from WiR!

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121 Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: "May" women / Mayors / Environentalists Geofocus: CEE countries Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Discussion about coup attempt in Venezuela

Hi Jamez42, I created an account so that we can talk about the coup attempt in Venezuela section in the List of coups d'état and coup attempts that I created and have tried to maintain. I'm replying specifically to your latest revert:

   11:38, 1 May 2019‎ Jamez42 talk contribs‎ 90,840 bytes -1,096‎ Undid revision 895002968 by 77.59.147.2 (talk) Stop edit warring and discuss the changes (WP:BRD). No arguments have been provided on how the 23 January is a coup attempt. Next revert will be a violation of WP:3RR

The arguments were provided both on the article segment and on the talk page, before you made the reversion. Could you please outline your objections to the arguments I have presented?

Best regards, DrTreePirate (talk) 12:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@DrTreePirate: Hi. I will respond to the arguments in brief in the respective talk page. Best regards. --Jamez42 (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Please excuse my question

Dear Jamez, sorry for bothering you , but on Live TV in my country is saying that my nation Argentina is breaking apart relationships with Venezuela but there are still no newspaper article. Should I wait? Thank you again.--LLcentury (talk) 15:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@LLcentury: ¡Buenas! Hasta ahora no he visto la noticia, lo más importante para que sea incluido en el artículo es que haya cobertura o reseñas sobre el hecho. En cualquier caso, también se puede actualizar el artículo de las relaciones entre Argentina y Venezuela. ¡Saludos! --Jamez42 (talk) 15:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Pefecto, entendido, ni bien salga lo incluyo muchìsimas gracias y Dios (si crees o no tòmalo como un buen deseo) bendiga a tu Hermoso Paìs. --LLcentury (talk) 15:23, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

@LLcentury: Así lo tomaré, un millón de gracias :) Si llego a saber algo te mantendré al tanto. Un fuerte abrazo. --Jamez42 (talk) 15:27, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Querido amigo venezolano, fue mi error de interpretaciòn de la noticia ayer, aùn mantenemos relacones bilaterales, lo que sì escuchè e que Macri (Presidente argentino) dijo que una intervenciòn extranjera deberìa considerarse si la situaciòn empeora. Te mantendrè al tanto. Abrazo fuerte a vos y todo tu pueblo. --LLcentury (talk) 17:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@LLcentury: Oh, creo estar al tanto de la noticia. La OEA también ha convocó a una sesión extraordinaria a raíz de la situación. Una vez más, muchísimas gracias y un fuerte abrazo :) --Jamez42 (talk) 17:12, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Mirá. millones de disculpas por ser de tanta carga primeramente, pero quiero contribuír lo más posible con lo que pasa en tu país. Creés apropiado adherir en la Wiki Española que Argentina tampoco descartó una acción militar?. Bueno, además, te recomiendo si por internet podés ver la HERMOSA entrevista que le hizo el conductor argentino Alejandro Fantino a un refugiado venezolano en Argentina de tan sólo 29 años. Fue emitido por América TV de Argentina. Saludos. --LLcentury (talk) 12:09, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

@LLcentury: Las disculpas debo darlas yo por olvidarme de responder, para mí no es ninguna molestia :) Te agradezco muchísimo el interés. Yo creo apropiado incluir que el Grupo de Lima en varias oportunidades la ha descartado, favoreciendo una solución pacífica, destacando declaraciones individulares, como Colombia, Brasil o Argentina. Pude ver parte de un programa en el que Alejandro habla sobre la inmigración con otras personas, es la primera vez que lo escucho y es muy interesante. ¡Muchas gracias por la recomendación! --Jamez42 (talk) 15:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Electoral system

So as to not get too far off topic on the Juan Guaido article, I'm just writing back to tell you that the article "2015 Venezuelan parliamentary election" answered most of my questions:

"Starting from 2015, the 167 members of the National Assembly were elected by a mixed majoritarian system; 113 members were elected by First-past-the-post voting in 87 constituencies. A total of 51 seats were elected by closed list proportional representation based on the 23 states and the Capital District. Seats were allocated using the d'Hondt method. The remaining three seats were reserved for indigenous peoples, and were elected by the community."

I guess my only question is how many seats does each state hold for the closed list proportion representation seats? For instance, how many seats was Vargas allocated for both the FPTP constituencies and the close list constituencies? And, the more I look at it, it seems that Guaido was elected from one of these seats and not the first-past-the-post constituencies as I'd originally thought, since it appears that more than one person was elected in the district in which he was running (i.e. Milagros Eulate). This seems to show that two people were elected from Vargas' "1st District" but I just want to be sure this was from the list constituencies and not the FPTP constituencies. --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Criticalthinker: Hi! I have to admit I'm still a little confused about the differences between the two systems, mostly because of the difference between term in both languages. The good thing is that the Electoral Council has the published results online, and in the case of Vargas, indeed, both Milagros Eulate and Guaidó were elected in the same district. José Manuel Olivares and Darío Vivas were elected is a deputy list, making that four deputies in total for the Vargas state. You can consult the results from each state in the website. The Spanish Wikipedia also has a list of the current legislature where the deputies are listed along with their states. Hope it helps! --Jamez42 (talk) 12:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm not sure what's being lost in translation, though. As least as of 2015, you have 113 members from 87 different constituencies from each state and the capital district, and then you had 51 seats elected from a list from each state and the capital district. I guess what's confusing to me is that for the first kind of seat, it seems that some constituencies elect more than one member while other's only elected one member, and I'm curious as to how it's decided which constituency gets how many seats? And for the second kind of seat (list seats), I'm curious of something similar: how is it decided how many list seats each state gets? Am I reading this correctly, and each state and the federal district gets 2 list seats? And if that's the case, wouldn't that mean the two largest parties would essentially each of these seats for the list seats? --Criticalthinker (talk) 14:26, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Criticalthinker: I'm not familiarized with the figures, but the numbers seem correct, the Assembly has 167 deputies. I have to admit that I don't know how the seats are assigned per se, but I can look into it further. I know that in the 2010 parliamentary elections there was quite some criticism because of gerrymandering; with less votes, the ruling party gained more seats. The constituencies are supposed to be created each year based on information given by the National Institute of Statistics, which in turn has to be approved by the National Assembly. Given that, as far as I know, there are few seats given for each constituency and that there have been plenty of voting irregularites in the last years, the distribution of said seats hasn't been much of a concern. I also can't tell for sure if the number of seats per constituency depends on population or another factor. --Jamez42 (talk) 14:48, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Oops !

Sorry, did not realize I had deleted that; I am having terrible problems with my keyboard since two days ago ... sorry! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:25, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Don't sweat it! I figured :) Hope it gets better! --Jamez42 (talk) 14:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

You're starting to understand all of my editing idiosyncracies! The typos are hugely outta control, especially with a malfunctioning keyboard. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Simón (2018 film) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Simón (2018 film), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Citrivescence (talk) 22:53, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Simón 2018 film.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Simón 2018 film.png. 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. --B-bot (talk) 03:03, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Jamez42! You created a thread called In the news nominations at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

On the ITN

Even if I support your ITN proposal to get back into the on-going events, maybe it wouldn't be that bad if we let it go at some moment to avoid all this push-back that we have received recently. --MaoGo (talk) 12:09, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@MaoGo: Should I withdraw the nomination? --Jamez42 (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so. Let's wait, it is not getting approval anyway. --MaoGo (talk) 13:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello NoonIcarus,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

June events with WIR

June 2019, Volume 5, Issue 6, Numbers 107, 108, 122, 123, 124, 125 Check out what's happening in June at Women in Red: Virtual events: New topics: Pride / Royals / Space Geofocus: Mediterranean Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

You've passed 3RR at Juan Guaidó

Hi Jamez42, you've just made 4 reverts to the article on Juan Guaidó in less than one hour:

1. [10]
2. [11]
3. [12]
4. [13]

Please undo: otherwise you can be reported at 3RR for edit warring. -Darouet (talk) 20:43, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Darouet: You're right. I could argue that they aren't reverts, but they could be considered partial reverts. Thank you for letting me know, I'll write in the talk page in short. --Jamez42 (talk) 20:50, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jamez42: Thanks. It's hard to keep track with so many people editing. I also reverted once more than I intended (though still under 3RR), because I didn't realize you'd made an edit in between two of mine. We should probably hold an RfC to resolve this. -Darouet (talk) 21:03, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Darouet: I just remembered that this edit [14] does not constitue precisely as a revert since I didn't undo the removal of the content from the infobox. Still, three partial reverts near the 3RR. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:06, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

International sanctions during the Venezuelan crisis

Hi there, Argentina just introduced a list of entry bans here. This is currently in development. Please inform your other Wikipedians who are interested in Venezuela. The blacklist includes all members of the National Constituent Assembly. Thanks --cyrfaw (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@Cyfraw: Woah. Will do, thanks! --Jamez42 (talk) 23:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Your e-mail

Not sure whether I will be able to answer your question, but I certainly can't without more information. Vague hypotheticals aren't helpful.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Unless you have evidence of another named account, I don't see anything to do here. The IP hasn't edited since May 1.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:38, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

June 2019

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Foreign interventions by the Soviet Union into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. QueerEcofeminist ^{"cite! even if you fight"!!!} [they/them/their] 10:42, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@QueerEcofeminist: Thanks! I'm planning on including the links once I finish with the article. Best regards!--Jamez42 (talk) 10:58, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Jamez42, ideally you should do that, as you copy chunks in batches, you should give proper attribution, WP:CWW QueerEcofeminist ^{"cite! even if you fight"!!!} [they/them/their] 11:57, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Hi. I see in a recent addition to Foreign interventions by the Soviet Union you included material copied from several different. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying within Wikipedia in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:43, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

July events from Women in Red!

July 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 127, 128 Check out what's happening in July at Women in Red... Virtual events: New topics: Sports / Education Geofocus: Microstates Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Initiatives we support: Atari Women University of Edinburgh 1000 Women in Religion Editor feedback: Check out the conversations regarding Sports, Sports, Sports! Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello NoonIcarus,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

June 2019 — 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis

Hi, Jamez42; I see that you just reverted my revert of your bold edit on 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis, with the edit summary "No new points have been brought to the discussion. Will respond when I have the time". I think the consensus-building process would be more productive if all editors followed WP:BRD and discussed controversial changes rather than reverting to a preferred version. In my opinion, changes that have already been reverted once should not be re-reverted if you do not have time to explain why. There is no deadline. Please consider self-reverting to bring the process back in line with WP:BRD. Thanks. — cmonghost 👻 (talk) 14:36, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Cmonghost: I can't find the policy at the moment, but WP:BRD establishes that the D must also be applied after the revert. The last reply does not really addresses the concerns raised the talk page, and rather continues antagonizing the reply following the line of the first message, which would miss the point and prevent the discussion for going forward. A discussion should also look for a common ground and for solutions, and not only be for refuting. At the moment I can't respond in the talk page satisfactorily for the time being, but I'm confident that I will be able to in the next twelve hours, so I would like to apologize in advance if my response wasn't clear at first. I also thank you for discussing this matter in my talk page first. Best regards. --Jamez42 (talk) 15:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jamez42: Thanks for your reply.

If you don't want to follow BRD, that's fine, you don't have to, but BRD clearly says the following: Discuss the contribution, and the reasons for the contribution, on the article's talk page with the person who reverted your contribution. Don't restore your changes or engage in back-and-forth reverting. You restored your own change after it was clear there was opposition to it, thereby engaging in back-and-forth reverting, and you did not explain your reasons for doing so on talk. In addition, your initial change was an imposition of your own preferred version while discussion was still going on. Again, if you want to follow BRD, I think you should self-revert.

I'm not sure what your point about discussion being applied after the revert is supposed to mean. I also can't find any such stipulation on the WP:BRD page. It took me some time to write my message on the talk page, so I waited to revert until after I already had the message ready (to avoid a situation where I had reverted but there was no rationale on talk). I posted my message, then immediately reverted; they were effectively simultaneous. The message on talk constitutes the rationale for my reversion; this is clearly a good-faith attempt to follow BRD.

I apologize if you felt my tone was antagonistic. However, the pattern in the sources (of which I brought many more to the discussion) is clear. It's not true that I am not looking for solutions: the solution that I feel is most aligned with WP:NPOV is given at the end of my comment on the talk page. — cmonghost 👻 (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@Cmonghost: I know it's late once again, but I just wanted to leave a reply here and thank you for your approach. I hope I've managed to explain myself this time. I'm looking forward to anything else I can help with. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:00, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Antananarivo stampede

On 3 July 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Antananarivo stampede, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

Stephen 07:02, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

RfC comment

This is re: your commenting-out of my contribution to the RfC. Is there some restriction on the originator of an RfC being the first to contribute, or some other reason for me to hold off from posting? I think feedback from third parties will be useful, but I don't think that requires either of us to not provide our own opinions. I also think it is useful to give a summary of my opinion there because the discussion in the section above is pretty lengthy. — cmonghost 👻 (talk) 16:48, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

@Cmonghost: No, sure it isn't, but like I mentioned I think it's more helpful to request the commentary only of uninvolved users. Feel free to make visible the summary again if you feel it's better, but let me know so I can provide a summary too. Best wishes. --Jamez42 (talk) 17:31, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jamez42: OK, thanks for the clarification. I'll restore my summary shortly. — cmonghost 👻 (talk) 18:08, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2019 Tajoura migrant center airstrike

On 5 July 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2019 Tajoura migrant center airstrike, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

Stephen 23:12, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Santa Teresa (rum)

Hello, Jamez42. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Santa Teresa".

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Lapablo (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Russia involvement in regime change

Hello, Jamez42,

Thanks for creating Russia involvement in regime change! I edit here too, under the username FULBERT and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

A number of the references need to be reformatted, and in spots the citations to those references need to be corrected throughout the article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|FULBERT}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

FULBERT (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019 at Women in Red

August 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 129, 130, 131 Check out what's happening in August at Women in Red... Virtual events: New: Film+Stage / Indigenous women / Millennial countries Continuing: Sports (through August 31st) / Suffrage / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: August's Indigenous Women event and the REDress Project Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Rosiestep (talk) 06:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Venezuela

Please:

1. modify Supreme Court of Venezuela to use the preferred name and provide a sound reference to support the change
2. go to Supreme Court of Justice (Venezuela) and apply a proper {{db-move}} tag.

— RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@RHaworth: Just did the edit a few moments ago. If {{Db-g6}} isn't the correct tag, which one is? --Jamez42 (talk) 09:53, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

I think in words not numbers. I have no idea what db-g6 means. But if you had actually read my message, you would have seen that I told you to use {{db-move}} which requires two parameters. Also, I am not sure of the conventions, but what is wrong with moving the article to Supreme Court of Justice of Venezuela? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@RHaworth: I'm asking because you told me to use a {{db-move}}, not knowing if that was the specific ones. WP:G6 means technical deletions, such as pages blocking page moves. I'm ok with moving the article to the proposed title, but it seems the majority of Supreme Courts use parentheses as a rule of thumb and the title of the current Venezuela Supreme Tribunal of Justice uses parentheses as well. --Jamez42 (talk) 10:10, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Heh

It seems that article did affect the pageviews of your userpage. I had a similar experience recently. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:07, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I noticed too. This isn't the first time that users on this topics are exposed in this way, and I feel the consequences could have been worse. My only thoughts is advising on perhaps letting administrators know to prevent any possible harassment. However, I see this unlikely. Thank you for the notice! --Jamez42 (talk) 20:18, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

VZ in the IACHR

Hi James,

I temp reverted your edit, and also to the map on Commons, pending sources. This is a significant development, but isn't mentioned anywhere in the article other than in the table you edited. There are consequences elsewhere. E.g., if (unlike Jamaica), VZ accepts full jurisdiction, then the IACHR decision on SSM is binding, which would affect our SSM maps. — kwami (talk) 20:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I found some sources. Nullification of the withdrawl, so that means blanket jurisdiction, but only by the de jure govt, so I striped VZ on the map. — kwami (talk) 20:49, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 at Women in Red

September 2019, Volume 5, Issue 9, Numbers 107, 108, 132, 133, 134, 135 Check out what's happening in September at Women in Red... Online events: New: Law / Military history / Writers / Geofocus: defunct countries Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Missing articles about notable women by "nationality" vs. "country of citizenship" Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiChallenge Venezuela

	Hello, Jamez42. I'd like to invite you to join in WikiProject Venezuela's WikiChallenge to improve Venezuela-related articles. This is a rolling challenge, covering many different topics — there's an article for everyone! Kingsif (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello NoonIcarus,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 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.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion

• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
• Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

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, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Just wondering

Are you the same user as Ridland? 80.233.34.162 (talk) 14:49, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

October Events from Women in Red

October 2019, Volume 5, Issue 10, Numbers 107, 108, 137, 138, 139, 140 Check out what's happening in October at Women in Red... Online events: New: STEM / Fashion / Geofocus: landlocked countries / Stub Contest Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Women vice Chancellors in Top 200 universities Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

ITN recognition for 2019 Ecuadorian protests

On 10 October 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2019 Ecuadorian protests, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 05:28, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Simón (2018 film) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Simón (2018 film), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 23:25, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

November 2019 at Women in Red

November 2019, Volume 5, Issue 11, Numbers 107, 108, 140, 141, 142, 143 Check out what's happening in November at Women in Red... Online events: New: Librarians / Leaders / Geofocus: Asian Women Month Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman / Stub Contest Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Disappearing articles Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Telesur

Hello Jamez. When you remove Telesur as a reference, could you try and replace it with something else rather than just leaving a citation request? Thanks, Number 57 17:44, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: Sure thing :) I will look into my edits to look for other references. Best wishes! --Jamez42 (talk) 17:47, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Francisco Rodríguez (economist)

Hello Jamez. Before editing Francisco Rodríguez (again), I double-checked my sources, making sure they complained with WP:RS I still don't understand the editing, especially when your undoing keeps leaving information that is no longer true (Rodríguez is not the current Head Economist at Torino, as he resigned in September). News organizations, such as cited in Oil-for-food (that you undid twice) and US Congress transcripts do qualify as reliable sources, and so is the main website of the Oil for Venezuela Foundation. Please, feel free to answer, as I don't understand the editing. --Naldox (talk) 13:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Naldox:, best wishes and thank for coming. The policy you're looking for is WP:PRIMARY. The sources you have included have a direct relationship with the subject, such as the oil-for-food official website and articles written by Francisco himself. Do you know about any newspaper or outlet that has documented this topic? If so, I'd recommend to include them, since these are more independent.

Please let me know if you have any other doubt. Regards! --Jamez42 (talk) 14:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello NoonIcarus,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 803 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

Tools

• It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
• It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.

Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes

• Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
• Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.

Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	WikiProject Venezuela Barnstar
	Thank you for all the amazing work! – Kingsif (talk) 15:52, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: And I have to thank you both for the barnstar and for your incredible work and translations :) Best wishes! --Jamez42 (talk) 17:09, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits

Hey I'd just like to thank you for the edits you've done. I don't know how you do it on the recent event articles. The ones no one cares about are simple, because no one cares and the few who do are passionate about the subject and it's fun to work together on these. But I've been working a bit on a recent events article and found myself becoming incredibly frustrated, you however have been doing this for quite some time now and have done an excellent job of it with dedication and without becoming frustrated. So for this I thank you, and express my admiration. Alcibiades979 (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

@Alcibiades979: Thank you so much! I'm interested usually in Latin American topics, and I have to admit the work can be kind of overwhelming sometimes. That said, it's good that there are other editors paying attention to the recent articles and their accuracy, and as such I have to kindly thank you too for your work :) Please let me know if I can be of help in related articles, I always like lending a hand. Best wishes!! --Jamez42 (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

@Jamez42:Ves esa vain en la sección de discusión me provoca. Son tontos, no leen las noticias que usan como referencias o simplemente quieren contar su version de eventos, no sé cual. Pero siempre es: <<no entiendo, explicamelo... cómo tiene prejuicio lo que escribí?>> lo he explicado tantas veces que usan referencias que no apoyan lo que escriben. La referencia de ayer con Costa Rica no decía nada, que quieren paz y no quieren que las fuerzas armadas hagan decisiones políticas en un país incluso Trump y Xi pueden estar de acuerdo sobre eso, y subito en wiki es algo como <<Costa Rica condenó el la violencia y las acciones del militar boliviano>>. O en la introducción de la pagina sobre la resignación de Morales, la referencia usada dice: "In the video above, we show how the so-called "coup d'etat" has generated a strong division among the world's political leaders. Political authorities from Venezuela, Cuba, Russia and Syria have shown their support to Morales and claimed that there has been an orchestrated coup in Bolivia... "We have seen world political leaders, not only South American talking about a coup d'état in Bolivia", Bolivian expert in Political Science, Marcelo Arequipa told Euronews. Some European examples are British Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn or Spanish Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias." Así que pasa, todos son escritos menos Rusia y Siria y después dicen lideres mundiales como si hubiesen otros y claro no quieren decir que los otros son Iran, Rusia y Siria. Que chimbada, pienso que me toca dejar wiki por un rato es vaina me frustra demasiado. Alcibiades979 (talk) 19:58, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Alcibiades979: En muchas otras ocasiones se ha incluido información que no está referenciada, que no está en las noticias, y es parte de las mejoras que he intentado hacer. Temo que esto sea consecuencia de cuando se quiere demostrar un punto apresuradamente.

¿Sabes si estos errores permanecen? Precisamente acabo de dar una extensa respuesta sobre el problema de usar estas palabras. Creéme que comparto con que a veces las situaciones pueden resultar exasperantes, creo que en particular este año, pero lo importante es no desmotivar y editar acompañado. En la enwiki hacen falta más editores hispanos nativos. Un fuerte abrazo. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Gracias y lo siento por usar palabras fuertes, estaba en un mal estado de humor. Trabajé también en la sección de la crisis venezolana y me enojaba tanto, jaja. Recuerdo que había gente de Europa y de EEUU que decían que la situación fue una conspiración de EEUU y que la situación allá era buena en realidad, que la gente era feliz y era un paraíso del socialismo. Y parce vivo en Medellín y quise gritar que veía los efectos del gobierno de Maduro cada día. Nadie sale de un paraíso para ir a Cúcuta, jaja. Y sí, pues supongo todos tengamos nuestras opiniones y esas opiniones forman como vemos el mundo, incluso supongo como leamos las noticias. Dicho eso poner varios lideres mundiales en lugar de Iran, Syria, Rusia y Jeremy Corbyn? Eso es otro nivel. Alcibiades979 (talk) 18:11, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@Alcibiades979: No te preocupes hermano, como comento, es entendible. La polarización y la desinformación que existe hoy en día es impresionante, por suerte hay algunas referencias que han sido vetadas por las mismas razones, como Telesur. Muchos de los editores no son latinoamericanos y reciben las noticias de fuentes alternativas, o recibe noticias por otros medios. Incluso así hay latinoamericanos cuya posicione e ideas contrastan notablemente. Lo mejor que se puede hacer es adherirse a las política de la enciclopedia, contrastando las fuentes y argumentando. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Santa Teresa (rum) has been accepted

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

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

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 17:26, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

2019 Bolivian political crisis

Hi

10 November events are not a political crisis but a part of the political crisis who began in October 2019. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Panam2014: Hi! I agree with you, but I don't know if there is an specific reason why you're telling me this. --Jamez42 (talk) 18:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

The current title is bad. So it should be a redirection to the article about protests. And we should find another title. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@Panam2014: I see. To move the article, the change must be agree upon the editors of the page. I invite you to participate in either one of the two move proposals open. --Jamez42 (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Just thought you may be interested to know that Amaruapu who you reverted on 2019 Bolivian protests is making similar claims over on Bolivia, despite being reverted primarily by me. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:54, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

December events with WIR

December 2019, Volume 5, Issue 12, Numbers 107, 108, 144, 145, 146, 147 Check out what's happening in December at Women in Red... Online events: New: Parliamentarians / Classical musicians / 2019 deaths / Geofocus: Arab world Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman / Stub Contest Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Disappearing articles Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Definition of an SPA

I see that the edit you tagged was not from the IP in question anyway, but I want to point out anyway that new editors should not be tagged as SPAs simply because they have few edits. See the recommendations at WP:SPATG:

A user should not be tagged as an SPA just because they only have a handful of edits. While all users with one edit are by definition an SPA, users with as few as 3 or 4 edits are not necessarily SPAs if those edits are in a diverse set of topics and do not appear to be promoting a "single purpose."

Three edits, all of which are about completely different topics, is not grounds to label a user an SPA. It doesn't really matter what order they were in.

— cmonghost 👻 (talk) 03:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

@Cmonghost: I understand your point, but the tag is particularly important in vote and consensus building processes. The tag specifically says This user has made few or no other edits outside this topic"., and even if three edits were made overall, this would still mean a 33% of all edits were made in this area. --Jamez42 (talk) 12:21, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

An editor with 9999 edits, where 3333 are about Bolivia, 3333 are about action movies, and 3333 are about crime and immigration, would clearly not be considered an SPA even though 33% of their edits are about one topic. 66% of the edits are about other topics, so they cannot be considered a single-purpose account. If you tag all users with "few edits" as an SPA, then all new editors could be tagged, which is not the intent of the template, as outlined at WP:SPATG. — cmonghost 👻 (talk) 19:22, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

@Cmonghost: 3333 edits about Bolivia would be considered as single broad topic. On the other hand, 3333 edits limited only in the talk page of the 2019 Bolivian political crisis article talk page is quite different. --Jamez42 (talk) 19:57, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Even if 3333 edits were specifically about the coup d'état and related articles, the editor would not be considered an SPA — only 1/3 of their edits are about the so-called "single purpose".

In any case, WP:SPATG is quite clear that You should under no circumstance consider anything that falls into the below categories as evidence for warranting an SPA tag, one of which is that A user should not be tagged as an SPA just because they only have a handful of edits. If you distrust new users, that's up to you, but tagging new users as SPAs when each of their edits is on a different topic is misleading, and it is contrary to the purpose of the template. — cmonghost 👻 (talk) 20:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Re: Sources

Could you be more specific please? BeŻet (talk) 23:12, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Your e-mail

I'll look at it, but I can't promise anything more.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:43, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Jamez42, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Happy editing, Kingsif (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

@Kingsif:, thank you so much, this WikiLove comes in a great moment for me. Once again, best wishes! :) --Jamez42 (talk) 20:09, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy holidays, man, best wishes :) Kingsif (talk) 20:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC) @Bzuk: Many thanks!! You too! --Jamez42 (talk) 20:10, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Felicidades!

		Faithful friends who are dear to us
		... gather near to us once more. May your heart be light and your troubles out of sight, now and in the New Year. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: Thank you very much! Please take care, my best wishes! --Jamez42 (talk) 20:09, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Be well at Christmas

	Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear
	Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork (talk) 23:31, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

January 2020 at Women in Red

January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153 Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020! Online events: New: Activists / Public domain / Geofocus: Central America / Year-long campaign: Sports! Continuing: 2019 deaths / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

Your submission at Articles for creation: Simón (2018 film) (December 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Simón (2018 film) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Simón (2018 film), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Jamez42! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Vector images

Is there an easy way to manipulate the vector images as you did with the map in Lima Group? Also happy holidays! --MaoGo (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

@MaoGo: Happy holidays! :) I use Inkscape, although I think Commons also has a vector editor. --Jamez42 (talk) 11:52, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Jamez42! You created a thread called Venezuelan cinema task force at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 31 December 2019 (UTC)