User talk:North8000/Archive 2

I've been trying to update the current list of cookies on Talk:Girl Scout Cookies#Trios discontinued, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of activity over there. I have a COI with the Girl Scouts of the USA, so I'm refraining from editing directly. I saw you're a member of WP:SCOUT and I was hoping you might be able to take a look. If you have time, could you check it out? I'd really appreciate it.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 03:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look and respond over there. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help with that! I've got some other changes to the article that I'm currently working on. Would you mind if I reached out to you to take a look when I have them ready?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to, I'm flattered.North8000 (talk) 22:30, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I actually managed to finish up my sandbox today! If you have a minute, could you take a look? I left a more detailed description of the changes on the GSC talk page. Thanks!--FacultiesIntact (talk) 02:00, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good at first glance but if you are thinking about us updating the article by deleting the current one and pasting in the one from your sandbox for many reasons I don't think that is a good idea. Editors there often want to see what the changes are, and except if they want to invest a large amount of time doing a "compare and contrast" between the versions they are unable to see that. Second, with normal editing of an article it's possible to go back in history and see how any individual piece evolved. Not so if a whole 'nother version is substituted at once. Next, it sort of makes it a one person article instead of a collaborative effort. Finally if you are thinking of me subbing it in, I'm not comfortable with the for the above reasons plus I'd want to see what the changes are and an unable to unless I invest a large amount of time doing a "compare and contrast" between the versions. But I'd be happy to put in individual changes that you come up with. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:36, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I wanted to thank you again for the continued effort you've put into helping me with the Girl Scout Cookies article. I believe I tagged you over there, but I wanted to ping you here for visibility as well. Btphelps offered a great version of the lead section, and if you're still interested I'd love any additional feedback you have.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. @FacultiesIntact: I got a couple pings 5 & 6 days ago and didn't notice requested edits in those; no pings since. Happy to go have a look. North8000 (talk) 21:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Rihanna

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rihanna. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:State atheism

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:State atheism. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 18:56, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Laffer curve

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Laffer curve. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 18:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ducati Monster

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ducati Monster. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 17:39, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of Liberty University people

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Liberty University people. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:01, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Category talk:Years by country

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Category talk:Years by country. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:T-Mobile Arena

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:T-Mobile Arena. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Roman Polanski

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Roman Polanski. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DoneNorth8000 (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Julie Payette

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Julie Payette. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:2017 Las Vegas shooting

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Las Vegas shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Abram Petrovich Gannibal

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abram Petrovich Gannibal. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:45, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Flag of Turkey

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Flag of Turkey. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possibility of providing your input on a Peer Review for Regine Velasquez's entry

Hi North8000,

I'm writing to ask whether you would consider having a look at the article. I'm aware that you've been involved with a few PRs before. I've given it a major rewrite and complete overhaul. I began working on the article late October when it looked like this and somehow ended up rewriting the whole thing and aiming for potentially FA. This isn't a process I've been through before, but I have been reading the reviews here in preparation, and am familiar with FAC demands. I would very much appreciate a fresh set of eyes and happily address any concerns you may have.

Thanks! Pseud 14 (talk) 06:54, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to take a look. I've done a lot of GA reviews, and co-took one article through FA and then article of the day...I don't remember doing any peer reviews, but I probably did a few. FA needs all of the fine points perfect and I decided that my attention span is too short for that. :-) So I'm not the best one to review it for FA submittal. But I think I'm particularly strong for reviewing in a few areas such as clear communication and empathy for the reader. So, that said, I'd be happy to take a look. North8000 (talk) 13:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you North8000! Your input will be much appreciated! Pseud 14 (talk) 04:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 11:18, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Energy East

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Energy East. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 11:29, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated  tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

''North8000'' ([[User talk:North8000#top|talk]]) : North8000 (talk)

to

''North8000'' ([[User talk:North8000#top|talk]]) : North8000 (talk)

—Anomalocaris (talk) 08:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! North8000 (talk) 12:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:36, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Had already contributed. North8000 (talk) 14:13, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The Harvard Crimson

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Harvard Crimson. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Battle of France

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Battle of France. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:45, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:American Flagg!

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:American Flagg!. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 01:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:PAX Labs

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:PAX Labs. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 05:13, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most-preferred

Regarding this edit , "most-preferred" in this context isn't a subjective term; it's the definition of Condorcet winner. All the voters' expressed preferences are tallied up and one candidate is literally preferred over all the others. I've already provided references explaining this, but we could add more academic refs for the definition, or change the wording to "the candidate preferred more often than the others" or something more explicit, if you think that's better. — Omegatron (talk) 13:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As background, I was just trying to help out a bit....there was a notice somewhere asking for more eyes. Maybe it was overly simplified for me to simply say that "most preferred" is simply a subjective term. There can be several ways to determine "most preferred", with a simple standard election being one of them, and the Codorset definition being another of them. So selection between which of those many definitions to use is subjective. IMO, if "most preferred" went back in there, it should specify the context e.g. "most preferred according to the Condorcet criteria". But I think that "Cordorcet winner" expresses that in a more succinct manner. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Might be good to move the discussion about content to the article talk page NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'll do that now. North8000 (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done, please put new posts there. North8000 (talk) 21:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

your revert on machine vision

Could it be that machine perception only appears arcane to, because you haven't heard about it yet? Same with me. But if you read the perception article, what doubts could remain? Either we have a lie in the article, or it is about time that we accept the connection. -- Kku (talk) 09:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The end of my note got chopped off. I have no doubt that one could consider Machine Vision could be associated with that term and 100 others. "Part of" is more doubtful considering the sourced sourced definitions, but still very open to discussion and no big deal either way. But, even with the noted sourcing issue and also wiki-article structural issue set aside, choosing one of those "100" and putting it in the lead sentence of the lead I think is certainly undue.

Also, happy to and would enjoy having friendly collaboration with you on these articles. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:10, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:90th Academy Awards

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:90th Academy Awards. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:33, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Andrew Wakefield

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Andrew Wakefield. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:39, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Christina Hoff Sommers

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Christina Hoff Sommers. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 19:41, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of Presidents of the United States

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Presidents of the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

doneNorth8000 (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Neo-Nazism

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Neo-Nazism. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 16:00, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Windows Server 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Windows Server 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DoneNorth8000 (talk) 13:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Grangewood Independent School

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Grangewood Independent School. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:15, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The Ingraham Angle

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Ingraham Angle. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:37, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I am asking editors who have previously commented/reviewed an article I have nominated for FA. Additional comments or even an updated review would be greatly appreciated if you're not up for it then no worries . Have a great day – jona ✉ 12:54, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Central Bank Digital Currency

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Central Bank Digital Currency. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 11:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Record charts

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Record charts. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 15:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Al-Awamiyah

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Al-Awamiyah. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 11:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Kingdom Come: Deliverance

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 11:52, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Douma chemical attack

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Douma chemical attack. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Theory of tides

Hi North8000,

it's not disputed. See my talk page. Can you please revert your revert? Thanks. Waleswatcher (talk) 12:21, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, will do. You oughta either put or mention that stuff at the article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Fall in Line

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fall in Line. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:53, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Environmental inequality in Europe

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Environmental inequality in Europe. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done (at AFD) North8000 (talk) 11:50, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 11:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

pass

Please comment on Talk:Sierra Hull

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sierra Hull. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:58, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Wikipedia talk page

We left a comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Pop-folk categories are a mess. 115.164.51.60 (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! North8000 (talk) 19:25, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 02:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Albert Cashier

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Albert Cashier. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The question is whether to avoid the use of gendered pronouns altogether in order to break the cycle of edit warring between the proponents of "he" and the proponents of "she". There's a sample of a potential gendered-pronoun-free version above the RfC so that people can see what that would look like. Cheers, Awien (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Happy to take a deeper look. North8000 (talk) 18:30, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The Bank of New York Mellon

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Bank of New York Mellon. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 01:06, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:History of Crayola crayons

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:History of Crayola crayons. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:49, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 10:56, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Dressed to Kill (book)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dressed to Kill (book). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:TerraCycle

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:TerraCycle. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

doneNorth8000 (talk) 22:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Human evolution

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Human evolution. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 11:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of Humans episodes

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Humans episodes. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Short description reversion at Lake

Hi North8000, You recently reverted my short description at Lake with edit summary Undid revision 861570863 by Pbsouthwood (talk) Unsourcable because "surrounded by land" often incorrect. Also confusing using basin in a way that is different than comonly used for lakes. which I find baffling as it was a summary of the lead sentence, which was referenced. I would also be most interested to know of examples of lakes which are not surrounded by land, which you claim is often the case. Please ping with reply. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 16:35, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbsouthwood: Here's what I wrote there after someone reverted me:

Well, to start with, every lake that has either a river inlet, a river outlet is not "surrounded by land" . And, if one chooses to ignore rivers, those with larger connections to another lake (e.g. Lake Michigan, Lake Huron) ocean (e.g. Lake Borgne in Louisiana) are also not "surrounded by land". My partial fix (reversion of an addition which further entrenched this error) was reverted....with the only explanation given that my "not always surrounded by land" edit summary sounded silly. I'll just work elsewhere rather than get into anything painful trying to fix it.

My slight ire was directed at them, not you. Thanks for your work. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Technically I suppose you are right, but the book definition that I remember from school was that a lake is water surrounded by land, and there is the point of what constitutes surrounding, whether it requires a 100% enclosure or whether small gaps are acceptable. Anyway no worries, we can leave it at that. I was expecting something more exotic. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 21:53, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Loyal Order of Moose, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 19:51, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Boeing

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Boeing. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 01:47, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Chick-fil-A

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Chick-fil-A. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Anne Akiko Meyers

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Anne Akiko Meyers. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

holes

Yes, many metals have both electron and hole bands, such as aluminium. Some have more conduction due to holes, and so a positive Hall coefficient. See: Talk:Electric_current#Positive_Hall_coefficient for some examples and discussion. Gah4 (talk) 21:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Thanks. North8000 (talk) 21:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Ron Stallworth

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ron Stallworth. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 13:19, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Jennifer Aniston

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jennifer Aniston. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 10:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Mojo & The Bayou Gypsies) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Mojo & The Bayou Gypsies.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process.

Thanks for your well-developed new article on Mojo & The Bayou Gypsies.

To reply, leave a comment here and ping me.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:14, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Doomsdayer520: Thanks for your post, compliment and work. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:35, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Mohammad bin Salman

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mohammad bin Salman. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decision tree learning: revision 871814793

Hi North8000,

You undid revision 871814793 (Decision tree learning). In this revision I prevented aggression from user ForgotMyPW, who just permanently removes information. You can see that revision 871814793 isn't related to any "multi-article aggressive promotional campaign", and only restored published earlier information about robust method (published, cited). Could you, please, don't support this war against users of Wikipedia and revert this commit back during the next day.

Truly yours Michael Bree (talk) 18:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my answer is that if you still think that it is a useful addition to the article, discuss it in the talk page of the article. The entire edit history of your account is three edits, two are insertion and re-insertion of that item and paper, the third is this post on my talk page. And the spamming attack on those articles has consisted mostly of bunch of accounts who have done the same thing, and have a lifetime edit history or 1 or 2 edits, those being insertion of that item. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:01, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Sammi Giancola

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sammi Giancola. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bekir Fikri

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bekir Fikri. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:11, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Huggums537

Hello,

As you know I have been considering this users unblock request. One of the restrictions I am considering as part of this unblock request is to have editors "monitor" his edits (look at them to check them) to ensure that he is not slipping back to what got him blocked in the first place. Would you be prepared to do this?-- 5 albert square (talk) 09:19, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'd be happy to. I think that that type of an individual (well intentioned but still learning) could benefit a lot from that. North8000 (talk) 13:02, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - I'm just waiting on the response of one other editor :)-- 5 albert square (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

North8000, Thank you very much for your support! It has been a great comfort just knowing someone has been there all this time. Thanks so much for sticking with me! Huggums537 (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be tough if need be. North8000 (talk) 17:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. Thanks for your agreement to be a monitor. Huggums537 (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a monitor, what are your thoughts about my recent lengthy comment to my talk page regarding some objections I have to the restrictions? I want to maintain good relations with the reviewing admin while standing up firmly for my freedoms at the same time so I don't get walked all over like a door mat. It's a tricky situation, I think. How am I doing? Huggums537 (talk) 18:18, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you an email. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:49, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Xmas!

Merry Christmas North8000! Thank you for helping me to rejoin you just in time for this wonderful holiday on here! Best wishes for you and your loved ones! Huggums537 (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And a Merry Christmas to you! Welcome back and have fun! North8000 (talk) 18:12, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Xmas

	Merry Xmas
	Merry Xmas and Happy New Year! Thanks for all your help :) 5 albert square (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, North8000! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Hello North8000: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, 5 albert square (talk) 23:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Please comment on Talk:Matthias Corvinus

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Matthias Corvinus. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 05:13, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Oswald Boelcke

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Oswald Boelcke. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ice bear redirect

I'm a bit unclear about your revert at polar bear to remove the hatnote for the ice bear redirect. In your edit summary, Not even polar bear, and too specific and redundant to disambig page if it was, did you mean that ice bear should be changed to not redirect to polar bear? (It was a redirect that I did not create.) Or did you mean that a reader looking for Ice Bear or Ice Bears (disambiguation), but mistakenly entered ice bear (case and plural difference) instead should figure out their mistake themselves? Thanks in advance.—Bagumba (talk) 01:07, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post. Here's my thoughts. If you do not agree, would be very happy to sort it out in talk at the article and would be happy with whatever the discussion ends up as. This is an article on a very prominent topic. You basically added these three things to the disambig place, the top of the article

Notification that "Ice bear" redirects to this article,
Where to go if one is interested in a character from a particular TV show named "Ice bear)
Where to look for other uses of the term "Ice Bear"

IMHO: On #1, it is not normal or needed to say what has been redirected to this article. On #2 and #3, disambigs are for the topic of the article and #2 and #3 are not the topic of the article. Again, if you disagree, happy to have a discussion in talk and go with whatever the outcome is. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Per the redirect guideline WP:R#ASTONISH, If the redirected term could have other meanings, a hatnote (examples) should be placed at the top of the target article or targeted section that will direct readers to the other meanings or to a relevant disambiguation page. I'm not a polar bear expert, but I never thought of ice bear as being synoymous with polar bears before seeing the Wikipedia redirect. Another option is To just change ice bear to be a disambiguation page (or redirect to one) instead of it going to "Polar bear" directly as a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 15:50, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Those are my thoughts but I'm perfectly happy however it ends up. I'll just step back on this.....feel free to change it per your discretion or else bring it up on talk. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, i will add it back per the WP:R#ASTONISH guideline. Likewise, feel free to start a discussion on the article talk or elsewhere if you think WP:IAR should apply to Polar bear, or that consensus should change on general hatnotes for redirects. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 07:20, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think Bagumba's edit is generally helpful, and would support it in a discussion. The only part that seems a little off to me is saying that "Ice Bear" redirects here. Maybe that part is not needed since that message is already automatically generated if someone reaches the page by searching for that term. That is why it would be redundant. So, I can see exactly what North is saying there. Other than that, I think it's a helpful edit within the guidelines. Could you maybe modify it to take the redundant part out? I do like the fact this came up because the idea of creating a redirect to a disambig is something I had not considered before until now. So, this conversation is provoking some fun ideas for me to consider. Thanks. Huggums537 (talk) 11:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Huggums537: FWIW, those templates are standard and oft-used, so I'd recommend continue using them for consistency. If any changes are needed (WP:CCC), perhaps bring it up at WT:R so changes can be implemented across the board.—Bagumba (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, bringing it up at WT:R or the like would probably be a great idea considering there is kind of a conflict with the redundancy that needs to be resolved there. However, I would not be the person that would be able to do that right now considering my current editing restrictions. Thanks for the suggestion anyway... Huggums537 (talk) 13:20, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not worried about how the article ends/ended up, but just to add a note to the discussion, this presumes that enough people were looking for a character in a TV show to discuss it at the top of the Polar Bear article. The character has only a zero-reference section in an article where the whole article has a tag questioning it's existence on notability grounds. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:04, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

North, you bring up a very interesting point that maybe not that many people are looking for a TV character. However, I think that is just the most wonderful thing about Wikipedia, that you might find something you totally didn't expect and learn something you totally didn't know just because you came here to read about polar bears. For example, I had absolutely no idea that anybody in the world referred to these creatures as "ice bears" until now. Isn't Wikipedia great! Huggums537 (talk) 19:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi,

Just wanted to say thanks for your assistance with Huggums -- 5 albert square (talk) 21:45, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, thanks for asking. North8000 (talk) 22:27, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Suki Waterhouse

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Suki Waterhouse. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Nobuhiro Watsuki

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Nobuhiro Watsuki. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 14:31, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Killing of Aya Maasarwe

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Killing of Aya Maasarwe. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:56, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Aurora, Illinois shooting

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aurora, Illinois shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:56, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Shabir Ally

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Shabir Ally. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 19:04, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 19:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Swedes

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Swedes. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 00:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bain & Company

Hi North8000.

Just wanted to see if this was still on your radar. No rush - just checking in. CorporateM (Talk) 14:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I forgot! Thanks for the reminder...I'll do that. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:PCCW

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:PCCW. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 22:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarianism in the United States

Hey, I'm sorry for this edit and replying only now. I thought it would have been a good addition, althought my edit could have been done wrong. As it stands now, it really is the history of right-libertarianism and of the Libertarian Party in the United States. It completely ignores the fact libertarianism originated from the left (even in the United States, where is the only country were libertarianism is not synonymous with libertarian socialism and anarchism) as individualist anarchism and libertarian socialism, among others. It also missed many center-left and other variants as well which are not right-wing. I wish the history section could have added of all this and I wanted to, but I did not really know how to start, so I decided to make it more like a schools of thought section. I did not know it would have been a problem taking bits from their respective pages. In all similair schools of thought section I saw it was done it that way, just taking bits of their respective intros to make it a summary. I thought it could have been a start to improve upon. --79.36.167.52 (talk) 15:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @79.36.167.52: Thanks for the post and your efforts. There has been like a 8 year struggle trying to figure out how to cover libertarianism. I've been raising the subject at the libertarianism project but it seems inactive. Apart of it is that the word essentially has two different meanings (in the US and elsewhere), almost (but not quite) to the point of being two different topics. (the same goes for the word liberal and liberalism) The top level libertarianism article has lots and lots of coverage of the various strands, and there are individual articles on the strands. There are also articles on various two word combinations with libertarianism in them including some classificatoin schemes (right libertarianism and left libertarianism) which appear to have no consistent definition. I think what's missing in all of the Wikipedia libertarian coverage is coverage of actual current practice and also actual current common meanings of the term. IMO articles like Libertarian ism in the United States are the place to build this. I'm afraid that I have to disagree at four levels with your addition:

Copying in a large amount of material from existing articles is itself an issue in Wikipedia.
That also constitutes a verbatim duplication of a large amount of material that is in other articles.
Wp:undue. Vaguely speaking, the vast amount of what libertarianism is and was in the US is mostly re-named classical liberalism.
IMO this is the most important guide; there's little or nothing about the US (e.g. libertarianism in it) in the material that you put in.

Thanks again for the message and your efforts. It's great to find a fellow live body on libertarianism articles. North8000 (talk) 18:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you very much for your reply and kindness for explaining me all of this. I agree with you wholeheartedly and understand, you have been really clear and helpful, so thank you again. I knew it could have been reverted, but I thought it would have been still worth a try to at least start a conversation about it. I knew that libertarianism in the United States is basically used in the mainstream as synonimous for classical liberalism. But what kind of classical liberalism? The actual 19th century liberalism which in many ways runs counter to them as they opposed any economic privilege, including privileges accorded to capital; and not all such liberals supported laissez-faire? Or the invented 20th clssical liberal tradition as a reaction to the welfare state which was already a reaction against socialism/communism to save capitalism; and in which classical liberals were a monolithic who supported laissez-faire at all time? I find it especially funny that modern libertarianism in the United States refer to classical liberalism (20th century anti-New Deal liberalism) when the term libertarian was coined by libertarian communist Joseph Déjacque in a critique against Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, whom Déjacque considered a liberal! Despite the fact that today the United States is the only country in which the term libertarianism is not a synonymous for left-libertarianism but instead of right-libertarianism, Déjacque himself published in New York in the 1850s and 1860s a journal called Libertarian. So even in the United States, the only country where the word is assoiated with right-libertarianism rather than left-libertarianism, it still started off as synonimous for libertarian communism. Unfortunetly for him, it did not take hold and with the First Red Scare the early classical libertarian history in the United States was all but forgotten and so the term libertarianism was invented as a synonimous for classical liberalism. Correct me if I am wrong, but at least that is what my reasearch and study led me to think, as far as I know.

Of course, I know the classical liberalism referred here is the 20th century tradition, but I still find it quite funny and interesting. Indeed, the whole history of libertarianism, especially in the United States, is rather interesting. Especially because unlike elsewhere, left-libertarianism is associated with libertarian socialism and the like, but in the United States is more associated with a libertarian form of liberalism/progressivism, Georgism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school which would be better called center-left libertarianism. However, all the page talked about was pretty much right-libertarianism and classical liberalism. Maybe my edit would have been more adeguate for a new page called Libertarian schools of thought, much like the Anarchist schools of thought. So rather than just make it like a schools of thought list, I should have added more about its origins and its relations to left-libertarianism in the history section. Because the so-called individualist anarchists who inspired modern libertarianism in the United States were anti-capitalists, libertarian socialists and left-libertarians, or more correctly just libertarian since the right-wing variants did not yet fully developed.

Now, I could be wrong and I understand they may not all called themselves libertarians, but from what I understood by libertarian they meant like the libertarian axis in the Political Compass or similair, because to them anarchism was indeed libertarianism and viceversa as synonimous, so for all these stated reasons I think it could be added and the history section extended to reflect this too.--79.36.167.52 (talk) 11:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 79.36.167.52. Thanks! You got into a lot of areas there. Too much to just get into here, this would be a great thing to work on during collaboration at this and related articles. So, PLEASE stick around and work with me and others on the articles. You know the areas that you are discussing better than I do. I think that I may have some insights to add to the party, particularly related to Wikipedia articles. If I may introduce those points briefly:

Writing is to communicate, and so the common meaning of words is very important when using them to communicate. It's also very important to include common meanings when writing an article on those words, which is somewhat the case with libertarian articles.
If the European English used the word: "Green" for 660 nanaometer wavelength light "Blue" for 550 nm light, and the American English words are exactly the opposite, in an article written for both of them, we should not use the words "Blue" and "Green" to teach about 660 / 550 nanometer light is, although we should what the European and American meanings of those terms are. This is somewhat the case with the words "libertarian" and "liberal"
IMO the terms "Right Libertarian" and "Left Libertarian" are even worse in that respect. Those terms are pretty much absent in the US, and seem to have no consistent meaning elsewhere. My opinion would be to have only brief articles on those terms, describing the common meanings of them, and to not use those terms to define anything libertarian.
Libertarianism in Europe has some long and complex philosophical roots, and varying strands. This really isn't the case in the US. Here it'm mostly a "phenomenon" and a general current meaning and usage of the term, and a distant second to that would be the US Libertarian party. So in the article on libertarainism in the US, we should confine ourselves to sourcing that mentions the US...this would keep it focused on actual US libertarianism.

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Rigel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rigel. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DoneNorth8000 (talk)

Please comment on Talk:2018 Strasbourg attack

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2018 Strasbourg attack. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Decline in insect populations

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Decline in insect populations. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 11:08, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Lady Louise Windsor

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Lady Louise Windsor. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

doneNorth8000 (talk) 12:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China and Chinese-related articles

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China and Chinese-related articles. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Falun Gong

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Falun Gong. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 00:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:China–United States trade war

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:China–United States trade war. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Call You Mine

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Call You Mine. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Electric smoking system

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Main Page

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Main Page. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Constitution

I noticed that on WP:FRAM you added a section about creating a constitution to solve certain problems. While I somewhat disagree with the framing (I would think that the rules governing how editors interact with the content and each other would be more "constitutional" than those governing our relationship with the host organization), I do think it's important to clarify certain fundamental issues. To start, I began a discussion in the Idea Lab about the scope of Wikipedia self-governance. I'd appreciate it if you could weigh in there. Thanks. --Yair rand (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite. BTW, my idea was even bigger than that. Replace the current constitution that governs WMF with one that is not as prone to such problems. Take out self-elected board members, for instance. North8000 (talk) 11:07, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But happy to go there and see if I can help. North8000 (talk) 20:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The Guardian

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Guardian. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:37, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Antifa (United States)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Antifa (United States). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:36, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:37, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:05, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Rachel Campos-Duffy

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rachel Campos-Duffy. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:02, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 11:50, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article criteria

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Good article criteria. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:05, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Robert Christgau

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Robert Christgau. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Please comment on Template talk:Timelines of Chinese history

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Timelines of Chinese history. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 11:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Kodomo no Jikan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kodomo no Jikan. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of terrorist incidents

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of terrorist incidents. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 10:38, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:IHeartRadio Canada

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:IHeartRadio Canada. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 12:35, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia as a press source

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia as a press source. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 11:10, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Libertarianism contributions

Thank youǃ :) And apologies for that; I was still working on it and wanted to publish it by several smaller edits but accidentally clicked on Publish changes. Anyway, I don't think the 90,000,000 people example works; Wikipedia works by reliable sources and I agree with Pfhorrest's comparision to football, etc. Also, as I stated elsewhere, I don't think there's a strict, or even single, definition for any political philosophy, yet Wikipedia uses a definition on what reliable sources generally agree with. There're "lots of things under discussion [that] are social constructs and fuzzy contentious abstract concepts", yet they're still discussed about and have some generally agreed definition that we put on Wikipedia as that's what reliable sources generally agree with. It's my understanding that Wikipedia doesn't represent the truth, or any objective truth, but rather verifiabilty based on reliable sources; and isn't a dictionary. Right-libertarianism refers to the Rothbard-Nozick et all tradition that came out from 19th-century libertarianism while American libertarianism is the 20th-century libertarianism that developed as a revival of classical liberalism in the United States after liberalism became associated with the New Deal. Yet, both are American libertarian, but not all American libertarianism is right-libertarian, hence why we have two pages describing two similar, correleted, whatever you want, but still different concepts that are worth or notable; just like we have articles of different strands of other philosophies like socialism, liberalism, conservatism, etc.--Davide King (talk) 23:36, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Davide King: Thanks for the message. Although I do have an opinion on the current questions, I'm not overly concerned how the current questions get decided. My main goal is just that there be a good process and one that moves forward to some type of conclusion. I do want the libertarian articles to end up informative. I also though it helpful to point out that when trying to cover a very large, vague and mild phenomena (e.g the "90,000,000" in the US) that trying to place such in a family tree of highly thought out and fully developed ideologies (a concept which is useful way to define and understand other forms of libertarianism) and to try to define it by such is going to be less informative. North8000 (talk) 21:51, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, but I would like for you to tell me more about it. What's your understanding of it? What should it be about? Libertarianism in the United States includes the libertarianism "developed by anarcho-capitalist author Murray Rothbard, who based it off out of 19th-century libertarianism and American individualist anarchists such as Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner while rejecting their labor theory of value, substituting it with Austrian School economics and the subjective theory of value" and the "libertarianism that developed as a revival of classical liberalism in the United States after liberalism became associated with the New Deal", i.e. "conservative on economic issues (economic liberalism) and liberal on personal freedom (civil libertarianism), often associated with a foreign policy of non-interventionism". It also include "anarchist and libertarian socialist tendencies, although they are not as widespread as in other countries". Do you disagree with any of that? All idelogies are like this. Socialism (democratic, libertarian, social democracy, etc.), liberalism (social, classical, etc.), conservatism (social, national, liberal, etc.) and so on. We don't have any article that talks about liberals or conservatives as a voting demography; we have pages that talk about their movement and the ideology, why should it be different in this case? You're free to create a Libertarian (U.S. political typology), or liberal, conservative, etc. You're also free to create a Libertarian schools of thought where we talk about the terms, what they mean, etc. This shouldn't cause us to not edit, so I'm restoring this lead and see if any other reverts it or disagrees with it.--Davide King (talk) 08:49, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Davide King: I don't disagree with anything that you said. It is just the if one limits themselves to the "lens"/ "toolbox" that works for European libertarianism (history, ideology, geneology),or pushes the article strongly in that direction it is not going to be informative on the main points of libertarianism in the US and be more confusing than informative. . North8000 (talk) 14:35, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's why we have Libertarianism and Libertarianism in the United States, for which I boldly added a new summary to the lead. Please, don't revert it (you can tell me your thoughts, what can be changed or improved about, etc.), let's wait and see first if anyone else revert it too or disagree. Libertarianism originated from 19th-century anarchism and we can't just act like one hundred years of history didn't happen. American libertarianism developed out of that tradition but mainly in the 1950s and it wasn't until the 1970s that became a real thing.--Davide King (talk) 02:57, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Davide King: I had already looked at it and decided not to revert. Again, a giant bundle of IMO good stuff and bad stuff. The worst was deleting the most important data, that on people self-identifying as libertarians and having libertarian voting patterns. Why did you delete that? Either way I figured that can be updated and fixed later. North8000 (talk) 16:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me what are the good and bad stuff so I can try to improve that? What exactly are you referring to? Are you sure? I'm sure I didn't delete anything, I only added infos. "Through twenty polls on this topic spanning thirteen years, Gallup found that voters who are libertarian on the political spectrum ranged from 17–23% of the American electorate.[20] However, a 2014 Pew Poll found that 23% of Americans who identify as libertarians have no idea what the word means.[21]" This is still in the lead. "Circa 2006 polls find that the views and voting habits of between 10 and 20 percent (increasing) of voting age Americans may be classified as "fiscally conservative and socially liberal, or libertarian".[91][92] This is based on pollsters and researchers defining libertarian views as fiscally conservative and culturally liberal (based on the common United States meanings of the terms) and against government intervention in economic affairs and for expansion of personal freedoms.[91] Through 20 polls on this topic spanning 13 years, Gallup found that voters who are libertarian on the political spectrum ranged from 17–23% of the electorate.[20] While libertarians make up a larger portion of the electorate than the much-discussed "soccer moms" and "NASCAR dads", this is not widely recognized as most of these vote for Republican and Democratic Party candidates, leading some libertarians to believe that dividing people's political leanings into "conservative", "liberal" and "confused" is not valid.[93]" Ths is still as it was before, but in the 21st century section.--Davide King (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Davide King: My biggest complaint was removal of that material, but it looks like you really didn't remove it. Because it was in that giant bundle and I wasn't able to figure that long-distance shift out in the amount of time that I had available. I like the majority of the work that you are doing. You are doing such a massive amount of changes so quickly, and packing them into such large bundles that it is not possible for a Wikipedia editor with the normal amount of time to donate to review them or revert any small areas where they disagree. In addition to the advice I gave you on your talk page (briefly, that you would be less likely to get reverted if don't do that on articles where such changes are likely to be a topic of conversation or debate) to put it more directly, you are editing in a way that prevents the normal process of other editors reviewing your work. It also keeps me from thoroughly handling this dialog with you, which I am enjoying. All that said I'm glad that you are here and working on the libertarianism articles. North8000 (talk) 19:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean more like this? I did that too, but I was told to make less small edits and to keep them in one; then I was told to make it smaller, so I didn't know what was too small and what too big. Anyway, thanks and I hope we can keep working on it and improve it together. :)--Davide King (talk) 15:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Davide King:Cool.North8000 (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mind Field is not a science fiction show

Hi North8000,

You recently reverted my edit to the article Artificial neural network with the motivation "is to a science fiction TV show episode." However, if you look at the Mind Field article, you see that the genre is education and science, not science fiction. I have redone my edits. If you still think my edit should be undone, please provide a valid motivation. —Kri (talk) 02:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kri: I don't think that that link should be in there but don't plan to re-remove or argue the point. Thanks for the message and your editing efforts. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May I just ask, why don't you think so? Maybe you're right and that it for some reason shouldn't be in there, but if so I would like to know what that reason is (especially if the link is violating some Wikipedia guideline). I put it there because I think it is an interesting experiment that turns an otherwise quite abstract construct into something very tangible, so the video (or parts of it) can be used for educational purposes, but everyone is entitled to their opinion of course. —Kri (talk) 00:39, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kri:This is one of a group of articles which have been having a lot of problems with reference/external link spamming. In short where where the there is more happening to help give prominence to a non-prominent source/site than to assist the reader. Being a youtube video/channel this has the look of that. Inclusion doesn't flat out violate any policy that I know of but insertion also doesn't fall under of the normally intended uses. But I'm not unhappy or upset over the inclusion. I just decided to step aside on the question. My thinking is that if nobody else objects, it's probably a fine inclusion. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see. Thank you for your explanation. —Kri (talk) 22:21, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Aphex Twin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aphex Twin. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:14, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Be well at Christmas

	Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear
	Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork (talk) 17:23, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SilkTork: Thanks! And I wish you the same. North8000 (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 14, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko^talk 03:25, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. This relates to the degradation of discussions at Talk:Libertarianism. Not certain that it directly involves you as none of your comments were in the section that I hatted. --Ryk72 ^talk 04:35, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm going to stay out of the drama side. North8000 (talk) 18:01, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I've just asked for an uninvolved admin to have a look over the discussion; hoping that it will be steered back onto discussing content, not contributors. - Ryk72 ^talk 18:11, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning an informal study

Hi there. I was conducting an "informal" study on the usage of Portals on Wikipedia, and for that reason, I've come to ask you a few question:

How often do you use Portals?
Which Portals do you visit (if any)?
How useful do you find them?

Apologies for wasting your precious time on Wikipedia. P.S. It's all fine with me if you don't want to answer these questions. Ambuj Shukla (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ambujshukla2004:Thanks for the inquiry. I'd be happy to answer:

How often do you use Portals? Never
Which Portals do you visit (if any)? None
How useful do you find them? Never of use to me.

The modern search engine era has pretty well replaced such methods of finding information.

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC) @Gerda Arendt: A belated thank you! North8000 (talk) 11:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for bothering you, but...

New Page Patrol needs experienced volunteers

New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions and review our instructions page. You can apply for the user-right HERE. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 20:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

Hi North8000. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. Barkeep49 (talk) 19:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Boy Scouts revert

Since the Scouts have changed their policies over time, I found the headings "Support" and "Opposition" confusing. In the article as I found it, and as you reverted it, the "Support" section describes support for the old, original policies, not support for the current policies that have been in place for multiple years now. I found that confusing. Also, i think articles are supposed to reflect current reality.

I'm ok with being reverted. What I want is to find consensus with you about what a non-confusing heading should say. It would be simpler if there was just one issue (eg homosexuality), then we could say "Support for excluding homosexuals" on one section, and "Support for including homosexuals" in the other. But we also have issues about in/excluding girls, and atheists and non-deistic religions.

How would you briefly and neutrally caption these? Perhaps just "Support for excluding people"? Or is that not neutral enough for you? What distinguishes the factions in your mind? Gnuish (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnuish:Well trying to get more specific, besides a challenge of wading into NPOV challenges is also going to wade into a lot more complexities. Regarding the policies themselves, I think that "homosexuality related policies" would be NPOV and then let the wording establish the era that is being covered. Thus avoiding trying to characterize or paraphrase the policies which is a whole 'nother minefield regarding exactly what they were and weren't. But the added complexity is that a substantial portion of the the support described in the paragraph is generally of the BSA itself or of the BSA's right to set policies in that area rather than of the policies, . The current concept of just having a top level "reaction" section and simply splitting in by "support" and "opposition" is sort of a cop out but does get it done. I'm going to try to put in an intro section under the top level section that might help / provide context for the subsections. ....see what you think. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching this group of articles

A group of articles targeted by an aggressive promotional campaign. They were partially protected and then the protection expired. Now it appears that the campaign has expanded to additional articles. I'm trying to build a list and watch to see if it warrants further action.

Artificial intelligence Pending changes protection circa 12/10/18 12/12/18, 12/12/18 (both stopped by pending changes) 12/24/18 lower key 1/24/18 Unrelated type 3/26 part of campaign
Artificial neural network 11/30/18 1/10/19 5/14/19 (this one looked different)
Binary decision diagram 11/21/18 by (now-indeffed) account whose only edits were that insertion in multiple articles.
Chi-square automatic interaction detection 6/17/18, 8/12/18 1/5/19 (low key and seperate)
Decision tree About 8 times July 2018 Same edit June 9, 2019
Decision tree learning About 10 times July 2018 11/21/18 by (now-indeffed) account whose only edits were that insertion in multiple articles. 12/3/18 Editor blocked as sock, article semi-protected through March 4th March 9th, the usual, and by a new account with 4 edits March 11th, the usual by an account with 3 edits. March 14th again, same account . March2020 two insertions of the same edit.
Decision tree pruning 1/1/19 3/1719 Same campaign
Deep learning 11/7/18 by (now-indeffed) account whose only edits were that insertion in multiple articles. 12/12/18 12/24/18 lower key 1/10/19 borderline 1/28/18
List of important publications in computer science 11/7/18 by (now-indeffed) account whose only edits were that insertion in multiple articles.
Machine learning11/7/18 by (now-indeffed) account whose only edits were that insertion in multiple articles. 12/9/18 12/11/18 12/12/18, 12/12/18 12/24/18 lower key 1/19/18 3/13 /19....routine commercial link.
MNIST database 12/4/18 4/9/19 same edit 5/9/19 same edit 5/29/19 same edit
Mean absolute percentage error 12/9/18 12/11/18
Nonlinear conjugate gradient method One questionable added by an IP who randomly followed me and reverted giving vague complaint messages,
Pruning (decision trees) 12/2/18
Predictive analytics 4 times July 2018, then protected
Random forest 11/21/18 by (now-indeffed) account whose only edits were that insertion in multiple articles.
Regression analysis 12/9/18
Statistical classification Twice in June/July 2018. Three times May 19th & 20th 2019 Same ole edit and editing campaign

North8000 (talk) 13:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC) North8000 (talk) 13:31, 14 December 2018 (UTC) North8000 (talk) 11:04, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edith A. Moravcsik

Hallo North8000! Please be specific about why you want to delete this article. I note that this article is about a living human being and many things will come to light after his death. Then you can expand it better. In the meantime, it's worth the wait. currently:

There are articles in 2 other languages
there are resources.

What's wrong? --Crosstor (talk) 05:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC) Dates = of 99% sure linkspamming or advertising. I started this 12/3/18but looked back for a few[reply]

Hello @Crosstor: Thanks for the post. First what I "want" to do is simply to do my new article curation / review job properly. I don't "want" to delete the article, I just feel that the correct thing to do was to submit it for review by the community under the AFD process. I did provide the following explanation at the article talk page:

Reviewed under Wikipedia's new article curation / review process. Thanks for your work on this article. As a part of Wikipedia's new article review / curation process I just reviewed this article. In my opinion, this topic, to the extent visible in the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines which is a requirement for existence of a separate article on a topic. This guideline is described at WP:Notability and in the specialized guidelines linked at the beginning of that page which provide somewhat of an alternate. The core element of wp:notability is that there are some independent published sources which covered the topic of the article in depth. The article has only one source, and it is a directory type listing of her. Also, without such coverage to draw from, the article is just resume type material. I have nominated the article for review under Wikipedia's "Article for Deletion" process so that the community may decide.

The above makes the specifics pretty obvious for someone who has read wp:notability. Possibly you haven't read it yet? I'm not sure what is missing. If sources exist of the type required (independent published secondary sources which covered the topic of the article in depth.), you should put them into the article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns after reviewing Raihan Merchant under Wikipedia's new article curation / review process

Hello North8000! The article fulfill all Wiki policies, and that's why you have passed the notability requirement. Wikipedia is a source of unbiased information about a diverse body of knowledge. This article presents a new subject that people are interested about. In the true spirit of this platform, there must be no other consideration as long as the article meets the requirements of notability and presents sufficient sources. My status as an independent individual contributor need not be questioned based on any 'circumstantial evidence'. I have the utmost respect for Wikipedia and its editors, and wish to be counted as one, albeit a very inactive one. Sharan Shias (talk) 07:29, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sharan Shias: Thanks for the post. My only goal is to do my job properly. I will have to disagree with your statement structurally. First, regarding existence as a separate article, compliance with both wp:not and wp:notability is required; I felt that the topic passed both of those and passed it, even though it (and the subject's company) had been rejected by others before. My potential undisclosed COI editing concern arose from on third edit under your user name you created the entire article with references, with you obviously having had more Wikipedia experience than those two very tiny edits before that. Also the situation is such that him having an article plus your attempted creation of an article on his company (which the community decided to delete) provides commercial benefit to them which. combined with other aspects, raised concerns about undisclosed paid editing which Wikipedia is trying to deal with generally, beyond the existence/non-existence of any particular article. I noted that several had previously raised concerns about this and editing under multiple accounts on your talk page.

Second, Wikipedia has standards and goals beyond just those governing the existence of a separate article, so I would disagree with the "there must be no other consideration" statement. The content note that I made was that it reads like a resume. These notes are to try to help give a nudge improve the article. When reviewing the references I noted that there is other material on him besides the resume type items. One "two bird with one stone" advice would be to try to expand and evolve the article using that material. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:04, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tenghilan

Thanks for your response. I hope this Tenghilan article can be improved more in the future. Best wishes NikoUMS (talk) 08:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creating AfDs - and your signature

Hallo, When you create an AfD like this one, please don't sign it until the end of your post. When I hover over the "discussion" in a list like this one, all I see is "Reason". If you hadn't signed it in the middle, I'd have seen at least the start of your argument, enough to make me decide whether to follow the link and look at the AfD discussion or just move on. I thought at first that perhaps you had created the AfD first with "reason" and then gone back to give more detail, but it seems that you did it all in one edit, with the problematic premature signature. Thanks. PamD 08:44, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: Thanks for the heads up, including on why it's important to fix. From the discussions at new article curation, it's a malfunction of the new article curation tool, where it creates the first line but completely "loses" the "'reason" when entered in the proper place. So then I've been entering the "reason" a second time. The highly experienced folks know workarounds for the malfunction (e.g. using twinkle instead) that I don't. So I've been manually fixing it after the AFD page is created. More recently I've been deleting the bot-generated signature but based on the info in your your post I'll work that issue more thoroughly. Sincerely North8000 (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail!

Hello, North8000. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:47, 8 April 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

MrClog (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David Rice

North8000 -- Thank you for your reply. How, then, should I modify the entry for 2043 in order to pass muster? Please advise. DavRice (talk) 21:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DavRice: Hi David, as it says on my user page:"I like helping newbies, especially ones who are experts in their fields but are having trouble understanding Wikipedia....." That's my only interest, nothing to do with any particular page or article. It looked like you could use a little advice in a Wikipedia area that is often confusing to people that are new to it. If you like to understand Wikipedia more in this area I would read these two policies: WP:v and wp:nor which are two of the 3 important policies to read. I'd also be happy to help with any specific questions. North8000 (talk) 11:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David Rice

Hello, North8000 -- Thank you for your reply. I am a little confused. On 2040s page, I got a response from HiLo48 -- but here also a response from yourself, North8000. I asked HiLo48 if he and you were known to each other and both working together -- he says no. So what is the situation. Is there more than one editor responsible for this? Or some overlapping? Please advise. Thank you -- David RiceDavRice (talk) 04:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See above.North8000 (talk) 11:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

David Rice

Hello, North8000 -- Thank you, I appreciate your note. I have read up on the two areas, and replied in some detail to HiLo48. With thanks -- David RiceDavRice (talk) 06:47, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article deletion

You submitted Mehki Raine for deletion and it has since been deleted. I had been editing it after your submission to make improvements and save the article and I believe the proper corrections were made to make the article credible but the deletion discussion was not updated after the edits. Is there any way the article can be restored? Bleu444 (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Bleu444: The question was not the quality of the article. The question is whether or not the topic complies with wp:notability requirements for existence as a separate article. This requires either meeting the sourcing requirements of wp:gng or meeting the special requirements at Wikipedia:Notability (music). Meeting Wikipedia:Notability (music) appears very unlikely which leaves meeting the sourcing requirements of WP:GNG. For that you basically need two independent published sources that have discussed the artist in depth. If / when you have found them you can simply recreate the article but include them. If not / until then, I would not recommended trying to bring it back. Let me know if I can be of further help. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edgenuity

Hello! Thank you for your time reviewing the Edgenuity article. I understand what you mean when you say it feels like an advertisement, but after elaborating, I can't determine what I need to alter specifically. And trust me, I have no affiliation with this company, other than a student who uses and mildly dislike it. Can you state what wording, context, or sources need to be altered?

Le Panini (talk) 19:30, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Le Panini: Thanks for the post. It helps me understand the situation in order to try to do a better job of helping. I think that what has happened is that you are extracting the most readily available facts from the sources and are ending up with mostly the types of things that the company would say the way they would say them. You did end up including criticisms, but you are missing a lot of the general and description that thorough independent sources would write to inform the reader about them.

Ideally the best sources to develop an article from are ones that independent in-depth coverage of the topic. Indeed one of wain ways to pass wp:notability for the topic is to see if there are a few of such sources. The article was sort of short on this but I decided that the amount of sourcing and real-world notability is so immense on this, and that it is an encyclopedic topic which many people will be coming to Wikipedia for (especially now) that I certainly shouldn't fail (send to wp:afd) it on wp:notability, and that it would certainly be kept at AFD if I did. Upon closer look, I see that you have a really tough job here. None of the sources in the article are quite that ideal one. So in short, your job as an editor is tough because you are short on the best kind of sources to build an article from., Searching is tough because so much coverage is either by the supplier or by schools who bought it and thus are supporting it / their decision.

I searched harder and found some that I think could help in this respect:

https://www.edsurge.com/product-reviews/edgenuity

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/05/a-grown-up-tries-out-online-learning-finds-himself-as-bored-as-real-high-school-students.html

https://www.chalkbeat.org/2019/5/20/21108176/this-school-district-outsourced-many-of-its-high-school-courses-to-an-online-program-but-it-s-not-cl

https://miruscharter.com/online-learning-with-edgenuity/

Another way to look at it is to think of someone who doesn't know what Edgenuity is and goes to Wikipedia to find out. The vague "advertisement" type statements don't say very much. My suggestion would be to read those 4 sources (not that they are perfect) and to take what you learned and derived from them to answer the question "What is Edgenuity?" Hopefully that helps a little. Let me know if I can help. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:19, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers!

		The Beer Barnstar
		Thanks North8000 for taking the time to review pages for NPP! AugusteBlanqui (talk) 09:55, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AugusteBlanqui: Thanks. Keep up the good work.....a double benefit....to Wikipedia and to your students. North8000 (talk) 14:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Center for the Political Future notability tag

Hello! Thank you for reviewing my page USC Center for the Political Future. I see that you added a note saying it may have issues with notability. I was hoping you could elaborate more on that. I've tried to submit other articles and this has had the most success.

The first two sources I have are reliable sources, at least I think they are. They are the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. Both of those articles not only make passing mention of the Center for the Political Future but talk about it in depth. I also found this source from POLITICO, which mentions the Center for the Political Future, but it is in reference to the LA Times article about its launch. I haven't added it yet but wanted to run it by you before I did to see if you thought it would alleviate your edits.

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated I am hoping to fix any problems with this page that I can in order to make my article as good as it can be.--HarrisonJ09 (talk) 16:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HarrisonJ09: I think that that if you put that extra source in that would put it over the top on notability. The question isn't wp:reliability; it's about having in-depth coverage about the topic of the article. I'm going to assume that you will and remove the tag and mark it as reviewed. Regarding advice on how to improve the article, the article, and particularly the body of the article is really short on discussing the topic of the article, the center itself. Two ideas regarding this:

The sources that you noted have good material for this; suggesting getting some of that material on the center itself from those and putting it into the body of the article, and maybe add a sentence summary to the lead.

Most of the material that you do have about the center itself is only in the lead. The lead should be a summary of what is in the body of the article. Suggest moving that to the body of the article and them summarizing that in the lead.

Not that the other material you have in there isn't already good stuff. Happy editing and let me know if I can help further. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I added the citation and will review the changes and start working on them.--HarrisonJ09 (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Mishlove

I edited the Jeffrey Mishlove article and removed some puffery and redundant content. I also removed your tag, you can retag if you think it is still not up to par. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 11:59, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MistyGraceWhite: Thanks for the post. I think that there is a bit of confusion here; I'm not the one who tagged it. It was tagged for general enclyclopedic rewrite before I reviewed it. When I got to it I noticed two very peacocky/unenclyclopedic phrases in there which I took out and also a general wording/prose type issue to where it looked like just a bunch of choppy list of statements put in as single sentence paragraphs. (In my post at the talk page I was mostly thinking about the latter and I didn't have a puffery / peacocky concern after I took out those two phrases. You fixed the writing issue, it looks great albeit short. You may wish to consider re-adding any actual content that you took out. Happy editing. North8000 (talk) 12:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Notability workshop

North8000's description of how wp:notability actually works right now

Currently Wikipedia's notability requirement is an immensely complex kludge that mostly works but which few really understand. And most of the few that do do so instinctively from experience rather than being able to describe it. Here's an outline of what it structurally is and how it works:

The lead of wp:notability is not a summary of the body, it is a separate meta-guideline which defines Wikipedia's requirements for existence as a separate article. In essence it says:

A topic is presumed (with a seldom-noticed link to REBUTTABLE presumption) to merit an article if:

It is not clearly excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy.
It fulfills either the body of the wp:notability guideline (which uses sourcing as it's criteria and is often called "WP:GNG", deliberately not linked) or a relevant listed subject-specific guideline ("SNG")

Rather than being written worded as being authoritative criteria, the guidelines use vaguer, softer wording, in essence saying that they are merely indicators. Operatively, that means saying that they are mere predictors of community wp:notability decisions made at WP:AFD. The operative parts of the SNG's provide alternate ways (besides the sourcing based requirement in the body of wp:notability) to fulfill the wp:notability requirement. The SNG criteria give lip service to sourcing requirements by saying that they are merely predictors of sourcing, but that lip service has no operational effect.

The actual operative wp:notability criteria is community decisions at wp:afd. Wp:afd has a sort of circular relationship with the notability guidelines; the guidelines usually heavily influence results at wp:AFD, but the guidelines are written as if they are merely predictors of what will happen at wp:afd. Wp:notability-related decisions at wp:afd are based on (in decreasing order of importance):

Degree of compliance with either the body of wp:gng OR with an applicable SNG. (but sometimes the degree of compliance with the "un-applicable" of the two is also taken into consideration.)
Past precedence at wp:afd where such bypasses/overrides the written notability guidelines. Most of these exceptions are documented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes but a few others are unwritten.
Regarding wp:GNG, allowance for proportion of coverage to notability. For example, allowing for the fact that there is likely less coverage of a notable 200 year old historical topic than of a non-notable current local kid's baseball team.
Degree of enclyclopedic-ness of the topic, including degree of compliance with What Wikipedia is not. Note that, beyond the separate test of meeting the low bar of not being clearly excluded by What Wikipedia is not, degree of compliance and degree of enclyclopedic-ness is also an influence on "notability" decisions.

The most common review of whether or not to nominate an article to wp:afd occurs by the new article review/curation process / new page patrol. They try to follow the same criteria as above.

So what is missing?

I've now had a chance to read this (thank you) and to read the network of pages connected to WP:N. I think some recent edits helped but, as you say, none of it is written... can be written succinctly because it's sort of like a fluid version of one of those pictures which is either a face silhouette or a vase, depending how you look at it. GNG/SNG vs AfD, I mean. I've been trying to find simpler ways to be succinct about what might warrant a new article over on the page where we're sketching out a possible Request an article wizard. I've taken the liberty of focusing a lot on the word 'significant'. I know we use it alongside 'coverage' but we also use it to describe putting in people, here. Anyway, is that the kind of thing that could be a simpler explanation around the subject of whether or not a thing belongs here? -- BessieMaelstrom (talk) 23:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are the issues & Problems? Discussion

Treat this subsection as a talk page

To get us going, I'm bringing over some pertinent bits from the last discussion. (Apologies if this is really clumsy of me.) There was this:

The fact that wp:notability has so many kluges (SNG's) , patches (SNG's) widely accepted exceptions, and some glaring imbalances and is such a source of confusion means that some tuneup is needed. Even though the system mostly works. Sometimes the best policy is to put into words the common sense decision-making which mostly works. This would be:
A decision that weighs all three of these:

Degree of Enclyclopedicness (a consideration aside from just meeting the low bar of wp:not)

Real world notability as gauged by #3

Coverage in sources per the last 3/4 of wp:gng. And, besides being this it's own criteria, it is also the gauge for #2 although it must be unequally applied to compensate for coverage-heavy and coverage-light fields.
And determines if the the result is enough to merit an article in an encyclopedia which will "only" have 10 or 20 million articles.^[1]

And this:

... there are some "in progress" states as you are alluding to. One is for cases explicitly defined in the SNG's where sources are presumed to exist.^[2]

And this, ref types of articles in Wikipedia:

Vital Articles on major aspects of nature (eg: geography) and humanity (eg: world wars) that stand on a foundation of common knowledge

Key Articles that stand on a foundation of broad collective knowledge (eg: Lego); one might call that 'renown'

Subject Articles that require a foundation of evidence in order to be verified^[3]

Plus these things:

WP:V is non-negotiable; notability can't override that^[4]
The GNG and SNGs are equal as providing presumptions of notability^[5]
Some topics/people are “worthy” of having an entire article devoted to them (ie a lot of notice)... while others are only “worthy” of mention in the context of some other, related article (ie only a little notice). Again, we look to the source coverage to determine which level of notice applies.^[6]
SNG's stated principles and advice are contrary to their operative statements ^[7]
Another other guide... defacto says that a whole lot of topics are defacto exempt from wp:notability^[8]
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes^[9]
Other unwritten accepted practices which are applied^[10]
Lack of any clear and consistently used statement of what wp:notability is^[11]
The actual wp:notability standard is unwritten, and is a combination of the ostensible notability standard, plus degree of enclyclopedicness^[12]

Aims

to identify the main entry-points where WP offers a statement on the validity of creating a new article and how to make that judgement^[13]
to produce answers to the questions that new editors might ask when pondering their first article^[14]
to unify those answers into a single (working) definition^[15]
to identify all main front doors (four identified?)^[16]

References

Result: List of the issues and problems? Working draft

Treat this subsection as an article page. Ok to modify text, no signatures needed

The overall topic of wp:Notability is too hard to learn and too difficult/complex for newcomers to understand in a way that doesn't put them off posting a new article

Is "Harmlessness" a criteria at all? qv WT:Notability#North8000's_description_of_how_wp:notability_actually_works_right_now (David Eppstein 2020-06-07 18:19)

Speedy deletion declined: 2020 Shanghai Golden Grand Prix

Hello North8000. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of 2020 Shanghai Golden Grand Prix, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: importance asserted as part of 2020 Diamond League, consider redirecting per WP:ATD-R. Thank you. So Why 08:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs

Please use Twinkle for creating AfDs. Apart from it being much easier than doing manually, it will avoid errors like this - this AfD doesn't use any of the standard templates so it will not correctly appear on the log page. SD0001 (talk) 05:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SD0001: Thanks for the post. So my "mistake" was to use the main official way to do it, which doesn't work work! :-) I plan to learn twinkle but haven't yet. So far I have found info that talks about it, and how to enable it, but not how to use it. North8000 (talk) 11:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to learn. You just have to click/hover over the "TW" button, click XFD, enter your rationale and hit submit. While there does exist a brief usage guide at WP:TW/DOC, you don't really have to read it, you can figure out everything on the fly. SD0001 (talk) 11:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SD0001: Well, you just wrote the key missing part from the guide. Thanks. North8000 (talk) 13:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I read your message on my talk page regarding the Jabot (horse) article I got started -- but then forgot to reply to it. So, thanks for taking the time to be thoughtful. It is appreciated.Stretchrunner (talk) 03:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Amirul Momenin Manik review this page. Arif (talk) 11:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Md Arif bd: Thanks for the invite. All of the references are in a language that I don't speak and I'm not fluent at electronically translating that amount of material so I think I'll need to leave that article for somebody who is better than me at that. Sorry and happy editing! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:26, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Taiwan on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 07:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:12, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 07:58, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had already participated. North8000 (talk) 12:15, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Arthur Laffer on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:07, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:27, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Joe Biden on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pass North8000 (talk) 12:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2014 Syrian presidential election on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Glenda Gray on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Project Veritas on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:38, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:58, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hi North, came here for two reasons... 1) To let you know I still haven't finished Cornwall Electric yet, but with Wehwalt's kind offer of a first look, I'm confident it can only get better... and maybe enough to submit it for a GA review one day. I wish I could finish it, but cannot. There are four library books I should read, but COVID-19 has kept the place closed for months now. I saw a glimmer of hope this week that they may do a partial opening in a few weeks! 2) Congrats on the New Page Review Rights! I hope you're enjoying the work and that you find it rewarding. Ok... enough of that... now back to work... I want to see your name closer to Rosguill's name here one day. All the Best! :) -- WILDSTAR^talk 19:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Justine Kerfoot

Hello, North8000,

Thank you for creating Justine Kerfoot.

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

Hi, thanks for creating the article. It would be useful to make plain in the introduction why this person meets Wikipedia's Notability critera (See: Wikipedia:Notability (people)). She evident lived an interesting life, but this itself isn't 'notability'. Please also move the section 'un-used references' into the article's talk page as this sort of information might be useful to other wikipedia editors but not to the article itself. Thanks

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|Zakhx150}}. 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.

Zakhx150 (talk) 16:06, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zakhx150:Thanks for reviewing the article. I'm an active new page reviewer and we really need more folks reviewing and helping with the backlog. The article is only a 1/2 day old, being built in article space and obviously needs work and and so the copy editing tag and note on unused references are very appropriate. But there is one tag which IMO was applied in error which I plan to remove. The Wikipedia wp:notability requirement is to fulfill either the main guideline (the body of WP:GNG which is sourcing-based) or the applicable listed SNG which in this case is Wikipedia:Notability (people). IMO extensive suitable sourcing to fulfill WP:GNG exists and also has been provided in the article. This means that establishing fulfillment of one of the specialty criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (people) is not required. Nevertheless, addition of that information as you suggested is a great idea and already planned. Thanks again. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pure Storage COI Help

Hi North8000. My employer Pure Storage was accused of covertly editing the page, but I am not entirely clear what my predecessor did wrong to cause this. I suspect there is some miscommunication. Would you be willing to take a look? Happy to do whatever is needed to get the company in compliance. KimberlyLe55 (talk) 19:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to take a look. North8000 (talk) 01:16, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

Hello North8000. Can you help me understand the meaning of "1-2 independent sources with in depth coverage", so that I can edit better in the future. WP:GNG says: "Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material."

So with that in mind, and using the article Mothers of Diyarbakır as example, would sourcing these articles from Al Jazeera and Reuters not fix that issue? If not, what am I missing? -Randam (talk) 22:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There were a lot of sources there already (at nomination- ime) with only brief mentions and then a lot of sources added after the AFD, with a large amount non-english. Non-english is fine but it also some of the context for my following empathy note.

The only thing that you are "missing" is process side and empathy-for-the-reviewers related at the AFD. They are volunteers and are not able to spend hours on each article....e.g. to continuously monitor what gets added and translate and review dozens of sources to find that "needle in the haystack". Later in the process a few times I suggested that someone who wished to advocate keeping it to select and point out 1-2 sources which they feel meet wp:GNG requirements. Nobody did that there, and you sort of did that (only) here. So my advice is to do there what you (only) did here. More specifically my advice is to put something like: "I believe that Al Jazeera and Reuters are WP:GNG-suitable sources."

Note that yesterday I already changed my position to "keep" based on post-AFD additions plus the work and assessment of another editor. Happy editing! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I see now what the miscommunication was and hope my shortcomings are attributed to my inexperience. Thank you for your advice. --Randam (talk) 03:42, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to do it. North8000 (talk) 03:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Retzbach on a request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

doneNorth8000 (talk) 19:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mymensingh Power Station

I think it is not in a required shape to even run an afd on it, but also not a piece of puffery, it is evidence from Mymensingh government website that it is notable, so shifted to draft space, might someone will improve itMajun e Baqi (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Majun e Baqi: Thanks for your work and it is clearly not a piece of puffery. wp:notability, which primarily looks for coverage on the topic, goes hand in hand with being able to write an article on it. In this case, no coverage in sources, no article content, and the station does not currently exist. Either now or after it comes into existence, the best thing that you can do would be to finde sources that cover it and put them into the article. If you need any help let me know. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:18, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

lol, to understand the issue, if possible I may add sources in English and Bangla as early as possible, so improving in draftspace will be better, what you think??? and will definitely take your advice before moving it to main space Majun e Baqi (talk) 19:23, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'd be happy to advise / help. North8000 (talk) 20:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to some extent and still work in progress, would you please comment on its notability at this stage thanksMajun e Baqi (talk) 21:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Majun e Baqi: One question.... The lead of the article says that it is a proposed power station. One of the references seems to list it as an existing power station. Does it currently exist? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 05:35, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I think it is already started because it was proposed project in 2017-18 government session Majun e Baqi (talk) 11:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding wp:notability, technically, that is a characteristicc of the topic rather than the article. But as a practical matter you really need to have sources in there. Also, in practice, a generating facility will get a less stringent wp:notability treatment. Knowing that it probably already exists plus with the new sources it could already survive a wp:notability-based AFD. But the text of the article is in really bad shape so why not work on that in draft space. In particular, you need text in there to clearly make the key informative statements. Right now that is lacking. Happy Editing! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please try to overcome the bad shape of the text over there, ya, it is better to improve in the draft space, hope you will. Majun e Baqi (talk) 05:55, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I made my last post I didn't notice your latest work there. For example, prior to you latest work there was not even a statement that said whether or not the plant exists yet. With your latest (July 3) work you have the basic facts in there. I think that betqween the text and added references it's good enough to have in mainspace. North8000 (talk) 13:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to mainspace and will withdraw my AFD nomination. Happy editing! North8000 (talk) 13:45, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks! North8000 (talk) 13:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only the messenger, - thank Rlevse ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	lol, happy editing Majun e Baqi (talk) 15:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remedy for the bot's mistake

I think bot have again put the deletion template, hope you will solve this problemMajun e Baqi (talk) 15:12, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it will all work out...the AFD will be closed as "keep" and then the template removed. North8000 (talk) 19:01, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Denial of genocide of Serbs in the NDH

I have made some changes in the article Denial of genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia. Is the page better now? Do all parts now cover the topic directly? Can the Off-topic and Coatrack templates be removed now?--WEBDuB (talk) 16:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that between your changes and the one off-topic section/paragraph that I removed that the issue that triggered the two current tags has been resolved. I don't know the overall situation well enough to know how objectively-written the article is. My gut feel is that it is objectively written (except for a few poorly worded sentences) because the article is structured as a series of sourced facts/statements. This may be inevitable if there is some type of contest going on at the article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Draft: Mushir Husain Qidwai

You are invited to join the discussion at Draft: Mushir Husain Qidwai. Kindly, have a look so I may publish it to main space Majun e Baqi (talk) 16:55, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to. The main question for the existence of the article is wp:notability; everything else is a matter of article development. In the case of this article the likely route to that is wp:GNG which is sourcing based. The article has brief on-line sources and substantial off-line sources. I don't have access to the off line sources. The on-line sources do not constitute wp:GNG type coverage but do indicate prominence of a type to mean that suitable coverage is sources probably exists. And and it probably exists in the referenced off-line sources. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 04:49, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Madni Miyan

You are invited to join the discussion at Madni Miyan. I have added sources to an article with sources, kindly have a look for its notability, mentioning I am not the creator of this article, lots of loveMajun e Baqi (talk) 17:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC) Majun e Baqi (talk) 17:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for your helps regarding New page Patroler works, you deserve this atleast, lots of love Majun e Baqi (talk) 17:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Harassment solutions on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sending me notifications about "pages I started"

I understand that it is automatically sent to me if I made the redirect, but I believe this is the third or so time I'm asking you to not leave me "Page Curation" notices as none of the times you've left me these have I been the user who created the content on the article. If you find you've sent me one in the future, please remove it after. Can you please remove the Page Curation notice from my talk page that you left there minutes ago, and put it on the talk page of User talk:KpopMonica, who created the content? Also, regarding your comment on the page, Loona does have an article. The user just capitalised their name in the lead. Pings do not work for me as I've turned them off, and I don't see the point in having a conversation about this anyway. I'm just asking yo uto remember this for the future. Thank you. Ss112 01:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MSs12: I deleted that post from your talk page. I looked and in the process you received 3 posts form me; one compliment, and two noting that I passed the article with suggestions. The new page curation volunteer folks have to review approximately 700 articles per day (about 255,000 per year). At my current pace I'll be doing approximately 2,000 articles per year and even that is less than 1% of the total. Which of these sounds more reasonable to you:?

Me try to remember and fulfill special requests from each of those. Such as analyzing each one to find cases where the page creator was not the main creator of the content and the find a way to override the page curation process and send the note (typically a compliment) to who I judge to be the largest content creator instead of the page creator.
You just delete any unwanted posts regarding pages that you created instead of implying that I am remiss because I did not do #1?

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a barnstar!

		The Original Barnstar
		I'm grateful for your review of Ryan-Mark Parsons and your kind feedback too. Makes everything worth the effort. JPA24 (talk) 14:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Content in Notes column of filmography tables in Singapore artistes BLPs on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:37, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July

Please help watch tomorrow's TFA about the beginning of scouting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks for the post. Will do. North8000 (talk) 19:58, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Prince George of Cambridge on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Species articles

Hi, I saw your comments at Starzoner's talk page - Good start. We tilt wp:notability a bit for plants/animals, but usually not down to the species level unless well known, but I'm marking it as reviewed. Happy editing. Please be aware that this is not the case. If a species has been formally described, we automatically consider it notable and worthy of a standalone article. The cutoff level is at subspecies - we only do subspecies articles if there is an unusual amount to say about the taxon, so that it cannot be comfortably accommodated in the species article. For a species articles, there have to be special circumstances for it not to be considered notable: nomen dubium (or nomen nudum, if the dice fall that way), synonyms obviously, or absence of either original description or reliable log of same in commonly used databases. Whether the species is well known or not does not figure into it - otherwise we would not have ten thousand bettle stubs :) - The closest to a clear codification of this is WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES, which is yeah, not very impressive. But as a NPP reviewer you have to keep it in mind please. Cheers! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:10, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Elmidae: Thanks for the post. I just try to do the job as well as I can. Since the outcomes article is not policy or a guideline, I don't accept its pronouncements, but do accept it as a indicator of common outcomes, which I tend to follow. On the other side of the scale, I've seen the most core people at wp:notability talk say that this is not the case for individual species as there are millions of individual species and that (plus nothing that says otherwise in any policy or guidelines) was the basis for my comment. As I'm sure that you noted, I passed all of your individual species articles. Between the listing at common outcomes, plus seeing that an editor has taken the time to create a real article on an individual species, plus a species articles being on very encyclopedic topics (which I tend to weight), IMO that merits a "Pass" in those cases despite the opposite guidance from core folks at wp:notability talk. Thanks for your post and for creating the articles, and reinforcing that we both think the same regarding the end result which I intend to continue to follow. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Every so often some newbie nominates a valid species for AfD because it is "not notable"; these are always kept, generally speedily. There is really no wiggle room in the current practice, and no expectation that a valid species would not survive AfD. Telling people otherwise is misleading. I do believe you are doing article creators a disservice by suggesting that their species article is borderline notable but you'll let it pass. That's just not the case. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 00:36, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Elmidae: Thanks for the post. You've reinforced my thoughts further and I'll just pass those without any such note. Thanks. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks in return for your good collegiality! :) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 00:52, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000:

Hi North! Thanks for the nice words! One rarely gets anything nice on Wikipedia these days...I even had someone put a page I created on speedy deletion because he or she said it was "promotional" nevermind my almost 20 years writing here about different topics! (that are notable and I enjoy) so your compliment was refreshing!

Once again thanks and God bless you! ~~~~ Antonio el chetos Martin (dime) 12:27, August 4, 2020 (UTC)

@AntonioMartin: Thanks. Yes, too often Wikipedia is a nasty place, by the normal practices of even non-nasty people. I think that putting one's self in the shoes of the other person and letting that be a guide goes a long way. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support on a page you reviewed

Hello North8000. You were so kind to leave feedback after reviewing Ryan-Mark Parsons. As you may know, I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and I'm really not sure how to deal with this new and ongoing problem. A banned user once 'recreated' the page after an IP user blanked and redirected the page. The banned user only reverted vandalism and hasn't made any further edits on the page. A confirmed user redirected the page, but later agreed with restoring the page after I reverted the redirection, as they explained they didn't look at the page's history. I'm now fearing that because this banned user has edited the page ONCE (to just revert IP vandalism), it has cast a horrible shadow over the article and I don't think that's fair. There has been no discussion in the talk page either before removing content. The page is already semi-protected, but if that's increased I won't be able to edit the page that I have created. Any guidance or support would be appreciated. JPA24 (talk) 05:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @JPA24:. I hope that I am being of service to you by being direct. First, a quick note on my review. The think we most focus on is compliance with wp:notability. Generally if it meets that wp:notability, then it probably stays and everything else can be fixed later. When I reviewed the article, my impression was that this barely meets wp:notability, but does. Plus it had a "Keep" decision at AFD. Which also means that there is not a lot of in-depth coverage in sources to build an article from. My impression was that someone managed to make a pretty good article despite all of that and thus the compliment. With the core 30 people at new page patrol needing to handle about 700 articles per day, I didn't go much deeper in than that. If there is any "shadow" over the article it's that at first glance at it, and your role in it, and focus of the short wiki-career of JPA24 and a few other signs, it has the appearance of you being overly committed to the person who is the subject of this article, and the ramifications related to that. It is very unlikely that protection of the article would be increased to the point of you not being able to edit it.

The person (Drmies) who has edited and discussed there a bit there is an extremely expert, careful senior editor. With the caveat that most of the people you interact with have not had the time to thoroughly learn you or the article, whatever Drmies says or does would also be a good thing to listen to or learn from.

I'm happy to help people get a start. So the next question is: what would like to do next in Wikipedia or the article? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:36, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello North8000. Thank you so much for elaborating on the review you left on the article. I've mentioned this to other users as well, I'm currently learning each day whilst using Wikipedia. My short-term goal for my relatively new Wiki-career is to get a C-Class for an article - this happened to be on the subject of Ryan-Mark Parsons. There was a consensus to 'keep' the article following AfD discussion and as other users pointed out, it meets grounds for notability. Once I feel more confident and achieved this article milestone, I'd like to focus on a new subject (most likely British TV which is my interest). I only do this to pass the time and it has been helpful during lockdown.

Moving forward, if you have any advice on how to improve the quality of the article from Start-Class to C-Class, I'm completely open to feedback and would be very grateful, merely to enhance my own understanding of this platform. JPA24 (talk) 17:48, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think that you have done a pretty skillfully written article considering what you have to work with with this topic and the sources. Articles are written from sources, and borderline wp:notability means borderline on in depth coverage by independent sources. If you are able to find any more independent sources with in-depth coverage, and build material from them that would be a good thing. For anyone reviewing the article one thing to understand is that it will be under the magnifying glass as a possibly promotional article. After a medium depth read there were two things that jumped out at me in that area:

"The Before his media career, Parsons was a Brand Ambassador for Gucci within Harrods and Aspinal of London; plus several internships at the Palace of Westminster, Matrix Chambers, 5 King's Bench Walk, AIG and NHS" sounds like some vague promotional material from his self-generated bio which a source might have parroted. Real enclyclopedic coverage would be a dispassionate more detailed coverage of what exactly he did in those roles.
The wording about going to the hospital due to dropping caviar on his foot sounds more like wording from his PR team about a publicity stunt rather than a third party encyclopedic description of what actually happened. I wasn't able to look at the source (it won't display in the US) but either way my comment is about the text in the article.

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 02:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to ping @JPA24: North8000 (talk) 11:05, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you North8000. I'm going to work on this feedback and hopefully other editors will notice these points and make improvements too. Thanks again for all of your support. JPA24 (talk) 11:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Steven Hatfill on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Motion at Amendment request: North8000

A motion was posted on 21 August regarding the amendment request. It can be viewed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#North8000 restrictions: Motion. You may have already seen this and apologies for the belated notice on my part. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:28, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dreamy Jazz: Thanks! North8000 (talk) 13:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Carrier wave on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amendment request: North8000 motion enacted and amendment request archived

The motion North8000 restrictions: Motion has been enacted and the amendment request has been archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests#Amendment request: North8000. The enacted motion is as follows:

North8000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was restricted by motion in December 2016 (Motion regarding North80000). Recognizing North8000's productive contributions and renewed voluntary commitments, the restrictions are suspended for one year, during which time the restrictions may be re-imposed (individually or entirely) upon request to WP:ARCA if warranted. Any restrictions not reimposed will automatically expire at the end of the one year period.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 21:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration motion regarding North8000

@Dreamy Jazz: Thanks for the heads up! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 01:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of My Hero Academia characters on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020 on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help with writing an article split

Hi there, you recently made an edit at the Ely, Minnesota article and I am wondering if you would be interested in helping me out with that page. I have not lived in Minnesota for years but I continue to have a very strong connection to the state. I had worked on the Ely article and added a considerable amount of copy some years ago and recently read a news article that mentioned the current copper-nickle mining controversy that is presently going on in Minnesota. I also do a great deal of editing on the environment, for example I am the leading editor of Environmental policy of the Donald Trump administration (and I also added it to that article), so that sparked my interest. Anyway, after reading the article I thought that I'd just add a few words to update the history section. As I read more and more about the plans to introduce copper-nickle mining I found that the conglomerate that plans to open the Ely mine also have questionable ties to Trump and his presidency. So that added to my interest as well because I have concerns about corporate ownership of our country. I'd like to get more into that aspect but the section I've added is already too long and anything more is out of the question. I would like to split that section off while leaving a substantial but much smaller overview at the article. Also, the split would be very good for both the Trump and the BWCA articles and perhaps several other MN Iron Range articles as well. I've never written an article but I am wondering if you might do that, if you have the interest of course. Hope I am not being too wordy here but this subject is very important to me. Thanks for your time. Gandydancer (talk) 18:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Gandydancer: I love working with folks on articles, and am overall probably the most active editor on "northwoods" articles so the answer is almost certainly "yes". But I don't understand what new article you have in mind. Could you clarify? Thanks.

BTW Patagonia made a cool short film about combined BWCA and the mine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR_69AnAg1Y&t=47s

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely, lovely, lovely film. I am speaking of the new addition I made to the Ely article which discusses the proposed copper mine which is only a few miles from Ely and just adjacent to the BWCA. Gandydancer (talk) 19:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you mean an article on the proposed mine (and the related processes, actions and controversy)? Sounds like an article that should exist if it doesn't already. Fist step would be to find a couple of sources/articles that cover it in depth. This will confirm wp:notability and also provide a sources for some material to start with. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:59, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The NYT has this: [1] The Mpls Star Trib has this (an editorial but it is the Trib's position): [2] There may be more that I have already used in the article--I will check. Gandydancer (talk) 20:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, just clarifying, you are thinking about doing it on the Twin Metals mine specifically? FYI, for editors who are newer at it, the safest route is to get the article somewhat fully built as a draft somewhere, then submit it at wp:AFC and get it blessed and them move it into article space. Being more experienced and less patient, I'm thinking that we'll work on it briefly in a draft space to the point of deciding on a title and having enough sourcing in there to confirm wp:notability and then move it into article space to build it there. I'll start a draft space (including a talk page) right away so that, after it's moved our discussions will be with the article history rather than in my talk page history. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK,

Here's the draft space for the article: User:North8000/TwinMetalsDraft
Here's the talk page for it, let's move our conversation over there User_talk:North8000/TwinMetalsDraft

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:43, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, I believe that it would be best to just stick with the Ely mine rather than to include the Iron Range proposals. I would appreciate as much help as possible as my health has been very poor, plus I have a new computer that is almost driving me crazy. I'm surprised that I was able to do as much as I did at the Ely article. Here is one more site from PBS: [3] I'll move over to the new site now. Gandydancer (talk) 21:03, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uh oh, maybe

I think I may have edit conflicted with you at WP:RSN = HuffPo...will you take a look? If I did, my sincerest apologies. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:49, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Atsme:That was weird....it took my edit and it's in the edit history but it disappeared. I reentered. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The new edit conflict fixer-upper usually keeps both edits and gives you the option of putting one before the other, or vice versa. I thought I was adding mine after yours but instead, it deleted yours.

Thank you for the fix. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 18:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Authoritarianism on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:46, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tommy Robinson (activist) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ONUS

Hello, thank you for your comments at the RfC proposal section at (however we abbreviate the talk page for WP:V). I don't want to talk to everyone simultaneously or dominate the discussion more, so maybe I could hear your thoughts here before distilling some comments onto the page? I have a lot of questions to work out but I'm not sure how much you want to get into this. Thanks in advance for whatever you'd like to discuss. (I should note that I'm not sure if I understand the middle part of your comment.)

By your interpretation of ONUS, "", does that simply mean that an editor must provide a reason other than V to include challenged text, just as an editor must provide a reason other than "I don't like it" to remove the text? I think that does make sense as the original intention of the policy, especially if the first sentence of the policy is meant to be the defining text. (I just found this essay which speaks to part of the ONUS discussion: Wikipedia:Don't revert due solely to "no consensus".) I'm under the impression that the onus policy has been used in a way that is also related to WP:CONSENSUS, which makes sense to me because of the last two sentences. Maybe the policy should be split between WP:V and WP:CONSENSUS?

The second two sentences are where the confusion seems to lie. It sounds like the two sentences are in reverse order, if it's meant to say that if the editor who wishes to add text fails to achieve consensus then the consensus is to omit the text. Then we get into the question of ONUS and removal....and what the CONSENSUS piece of ONUS actually looks like in practice.

So, another question is, regardless of how ONUS is interpreted, what policy do we want? Do we want to say that once a change to consensus is clearly contentious the status quo ante version should be in place pending discussion, which would function as a sort of a trigger for WP:Consensus Required? Although based on the discussion at Talk WP:V I would expect that proposal to be strongly opposed, and it may not be possible to answer these questions without also addressing their concerns by determining whether a status quo version without clear consensus should remain in place pending discussion over contentious changes. Kolya Butternut (talk) 02:43, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post. BTW I'll be off the grid Sept 26th - Oct 4th. My post was somewhat abstract and wandering and so I think easily misread. For me your post covers a lot of big topics.....I'll just says some things and see where we go from there. Long story short, on the immediate question at hand my opinion is to leave it as is. If I could mess with the big picture it would be:

Add to wp:ver: "Meeting wp:verifiability is a requirement for inclusion, not a reason for inclusion". This is actually a summary of what wp:does and doesn't say, but too many people think the opposite. One thing that this would say would be that one could not used that the material is sourced as an argument for inclusion.
Create a new guideline or widely quoted essay that describes how inclusion / exclusion decision are made. Where policy does not clearly dictate the anser, it's based on a decision which is based on many factors combined.
Add somewhere: "when making inclusion/exclusion decisions, give the status quo a little extra sway, and when doing so, also consider strength or weakness of it's position as the status quo"

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 10:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So we're discussing what WP:ONUS means, but what does WP:CONSENSUS mean? I think using the words status quo is confusing here because QUO is a separate concept, so I'll say "previous consensus". The previous consensus only gets more sway in my opinion because presumably the editors who wrote the consensus text or who read the text and agreed with it, are not participating in the local discussion over changing the text. That's why CONSENSUS states that when there is no consensus for a change the previous consensus will remain. The "sway" is already written into policy.

Does it also seem to you that the last two sentences of ONUS have been often interpreted by editors as an extension of CONSENSUS? [[User:|Kolya Butternut]] (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolya Butternut: In my view this touches on lot of different fundamental areas which would take a book length post to answer :-) and where I've already given my 30,000' view. But briefly, wp:consensus is the closest thing to a real roadmap for discussions. Even it does not talk about giving the status quo a tiny bit of weight in discussions, but one level up it does so in the roadmap for when consensus is or isn't reached and the "presumed consensus" concept. In my view wp:onus should be deleted. It's only there as a band-aid because we've failed to put the badly-needed sentence "WP:verifiability is a requirement for inclusion, not a reason for inclusion" into wp:ver. The topic doesn't belong in wp:ver and what is there doesn't cover the topic. IMO the only reason wp:onus it is heavily used instead of wp:consensus which covers it better is because it's in a more prominent policy, and because it is short and because it has a convenient handle "Onus" unofficially attached. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 10:41, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, just remove the "WP:ONUS" shortcut, leave "WP:VNOTSUFF", perhaps add "WP:VNOTGUARANTEE" or "WP:VNOTENOUGH". The concept of ONUS seems to be essential, so I think we should move the handle "WP:ONUS" to WP:CONSENSUS. Kolya Butternut (talk) 11:36, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to make sure you saw my last comment at WT:V. The page is getting confusing. Kolya Butternut (talk) 03:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Kolya Butternut: I'm assuming that you meant the Oct 25th post. I did read it twice, but that's as far as I got. To really understand it would need a lot of reading/analysis at the referenced policies/guidelines which I frankly didn't do. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused; I thought you felt my proposal was a baby-step you agreed with? Kolya Butternut (talk) 13:45, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolya Butternut:Yes I would have supported that. But your proposal included a huge second proposal: "new section at WP:CONSENSUS § Achieving consensus#Onus to clearly define Onus as applying to new additions, removals, and modifications?" Which makes it mal-formed (two proposals in one). Also the second proposal is a huge and vaguely defined one.North8000 (talk) 13:57, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I felt that it belonged under the Achieving consensus section rather than just adding the wikilink to No consensus, if that's what you agreed to as the baby step. I also guess I missed that we didn't agree that there was a lack of clarity about the onus policy. You mentioned that you felt it would take several steps to create a new section under Consensus, what sorts of steps would those be? Kolya Butternut (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolya Butternut: We agree there was a lack of clarity about the onus policy, although (as a sidebar) not that it is significant problem. That does not translate into your particular approach of your RFC. Regarding the several steps, they would be:

Replace the current wp:onus at wp:ver with "verifiability is a requirement for inclusion, not a reason for inclusion." Move the rest of that section to wp:consensus. Change the target of wp:onus to that moved text
That move will make the conflict/ ambiguity more obvious. Resolve that by modifying wp:consensus per the result of a discussion there.

The above steps could be combined or further subdivided. I respect and thank you for your efforts. Respectfully, I don't think that your current approach (which is the standard Wikipedia one, so this is not a critique) is going to get you anywhere (which is also standard for Wikipedia) and is just wearing people out. My suggestion is to develop a specific idea which 2-3 people will get behind as proponents and then float and support that idea. North8000 (talk) 20:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ideally a few people could come up with a specific proposal, but I didn't see that happening. The RfC is ironic -- on the one hand people are saying there's no problem so there's no need for a change, and yet there's clearly a disagreement about the interpretation of the policy which suggests that there is a need for a change. Kolya Butternut (talk) 21:04, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolya Butternut: I think that the "no problem" people are essentially saying that the fuzzy Wikipedia system mostly makes it work. BTW my idea was a suggestion for you if you chose to pursue this further. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:53, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:René Descartes on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 23:15, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald DeFreeze on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 23:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice on an AfC submission

Hi. Please take a look at Draft:Terje G. Simonsen. It is a properly stated WP:COI contribution about a Norwegian non-fiction author. The article is a translation of a Norwegian Wikipedia article with a bit more sources. The author is a historian and writes about the history of paranormal. Considering your great experience of editing Wikipedia and also the fact that you contributed to Jeffrey Mishlove, I guess that you have a balanced view on the subject and can give me a good and professional advice. Please tell how this article could/should be edited or changed in order to improve the chances of passing an AfC review. Thanks! Peter. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 17:18, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbarmadillo: Happy to. It looks like it was already accepted both for afc and npp. It looks like an excellent job on the article based on the available sources. If you wanted to take it to the "next level" regarding article quality and being doublysafe on wp:notability I search for 1-2 more sources that wrote about him and incorporate that material into the article. Nice work! North8000 (talk) 02:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Bbarmadillo (talk) 06:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Republican Party (United States) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Stub on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 04:54, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

File:Christmas tree in field.jpg	Merry Christmas North8000
	Hi North8000, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia this past year, like this tree, you are a light shining in the darkness. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: Thanks for the Christmas wishes, I wish you a great 2021! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Batman on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment and at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and Talk:Signal (software) on "Politics, government, and law" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing edit requests

Please be sure to close edit requests that you grant. Gentle reminder to use the |answered=yes parameter in the request template. That removes the request from the Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests category. Thank you very much for your help with edit requests! P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 20:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Paine Ellsworth: Thanks! North8000 (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ben Garrison on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 14:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Joe Biden on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 14:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Philosophy Tube on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ian Fleming on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Valentines! Some sweet strawberries for you!

You get the Dependability Award! Thank you for being the kind of editor that other editors like me have come to rely on, knowing they can depend on you for help and guidance! Huggums537 (talk) 22:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Huggums537: Thanks! North8000 (talk) 02:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

notability guideline issue about Sadat Hossain Article

I wrote a article named Sadat Hossain. Then there is two discussion (1st Discussion and 2nd Discussion).The result of both discussion is keep. But for the 3rd time it is flagged as not notable. But as per WP:CREATIVE and WP:AUTHOR rules it meets the criteria. The references are from prominent Bangladeshi & Indian bengali and english newspapers. I want to permanently dissolve this issue. Jubair Sayeed Linas (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jubair Sayeed Linas: Happy to take a peek. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:10, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jubair Sayeed Linas: Long story short, you have a pretty strong case for this article, doubly so from a person who took it to AFD before. But before I try to help I'd like to know whether it is a strong vs. doubly strong case. If it has like 2 GNG-suitable sources it would be doubly strong. I think that it would take me hours (which I frankly don't have) to read and understand the sources. I took a look and immediately ran into things that I would need to figure out such as sources centric on names other than Sadat Hossain. Could you help out by picking and pointing out to me the top 2 or three sources regarding GNG. So that would be published sources that cover him in depth. Sincerely,, North8000 (talk) 22:51, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: As you can see the reference link leading and prominent english newspaper like The Daily Star (Bangladesh), The Daily Observer (Bangladesh), Dhaka Tribune and bengali newspaper Prothom Alo, Bangladesh Pratidin, Manab Zamin, online portal Banglanews24.com, Bangla Tribune, NTV (Bangladeshi TV channel) and Indian Ei Samay Sangbadpatra, Kolkata TV has stories about him. You can search through the bengali by সাদাত হোসাইন which is the bengali form of Sadat Hossain. I recommend you to look up ref 1, ref 2, ref 3, ref 4 ref 5 You can also find him on [Worldcat]. Jubair Sayeed Linas (talk) 23:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Jubair Sayeed Linas:. That's about 2 hours of work and would need to wait until I have that much time to spare. My previous request which was: "Could you help out by picking and pointing out to me the top 2 or three sources regarding GNG. So that would be published sources that cover him in depth." was to reduce the amount of time required and I'd work on the situation right away. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article drive notice

This message has been sent to users signed up for the Good articles newsletter. Add or remove your name from the list to subscribe or unsubscribe from future updates. Alternatively, to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

-- For the drive co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I'm Dlthewave. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, PragerU, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. (Regarding this edit, which restored the unsourced text "historical narrative.) –dlthewave ☎ 22:32, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

dlthewave, why would you post something like that? It's a very condescending thing to say to an editor who has been around Wikipedia for almost a decade more than you have and who restoring the status quo text given we are at a noconsensus state in the talk page discussion. Springee (talk) 22:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dlthewave: You have it backwards. I removed unsourced new material. Your post here even mis-represents the reason given for the reversion of my revert, they asserted that it was because there was no consensus to remove the unsourced un-consensused new material! North8000 (talk) 23:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that you believe the new material to be unsourced and lacking consensus. I explained why I disagree with that on the talk page. However, you are responsible for your own edit which added the words "historical narrative". Where is the source that supports that? WP:ONUS is on editors who add or restore unsourced content. –dlthewave ☎ 23:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Narrative" merely means that such a statement or assertion by somebody exists, which it clearly does, and such is already sourced. and that is the stable version. You are defending the substitution of a much farther reaching version of that statement which was inserted on February 26th. And there is no "I believe" regarding no consensus, such obviously did not occur. If you still wish to persist with the "I believe" insinuation, please point to where that consensus occurred. North8000 (talk) 01:40, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dlthewave: I took issue in several ways with the approach that you you took above and responded accordingly. That said, I'm ready to just move on and wish you the best and thank you for your Wikipedia work. At the article my desire is to try to be helpful and then not worry about what the final result is. Combine that with I think progress being made there and I'm not overly concerned about what happens next.North8000 (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

McKinsey & Company

Hi @North8000: those entries are entirely unsuitable for the lede. They are completely WP:NPOV. I had a chat with the editor on it already. scope_creep^Talk 15:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @North8000: You could perhaps do with getting this stuff archived. It is quite hard to write this entry. scope_creep^Talk 15:59, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Scope creep: My edit summary pretty much gave my take on it....the one revert deleted about 20 edits which looks like they contained some good info and sourcing and I felt the 20 edits should get a closer look rather than mass reverted. Maybe add to that some concern that concern about possible coi might have made folks go a bit overboard there. (yes, concern about concern :-)) That closer/ targeted look is still my recommendation but I just wanted to try to help a bit and beyond that am not really concerned about the outcome. Thanks for your efforts and work. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nancy Pelosi on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment, and at Talk:Breitbart News on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 11:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help w Soles4Souls page

Hi North8000. I wanted to see if you had a minute to look at Talk:Soles4Souls under “Requested changes“ or, if not, if you knew of any editors interested in pages about non-profits I could reach out to. Jamiemellis (talk) 16:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'd be happy to.North8000 (talk) 16:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crusades on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DoneNorth8000 (talk) 13:58, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Goths on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Moses on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Chicago Police Department on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting WikiProject

		Merit Badge Sash Award
		Thank you for your dedication to Scouting! --evrik ^(talk) 20:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! North8000 (talk) 20:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Isaac Bashevis Singer on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:George VI on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 17:20, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

Please share your views on Talk:Elizabeth II#Head of the Commonwealth, as you did at the talk page of George VI. Thank you! Peter Ormond (talk) 00:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter Ormond:Thanks for the invite. Done. North8000 (talk) 17:25, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Rust (programming language) on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:31, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for peer review help

Hi North8000. I hope you are doing well and staying safe during these times! Apologize to bother and posting a random request. I have just started to work on a stub (Fontainea Venosa)and had added some sections. Knowing your expertise, I would love if you can help me to review and left a comment on what I can do to improve my edits. I hope that this is okay, but no pressure if you are busy. That is completely fine and understandable :) Hope to hear from you soon. The article is Fontainea Venosa

Thank you so much :) Sparklingkull (talk) 09:37, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sparklingkull: Sure, I'd be happy to. North8000 (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Senedd on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 14:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Buffalo, New York on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 23:45, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth II on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 15:32, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Banderites on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DoneNorth8000 (talk) 15:31, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:B. R. Ambedkar on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mitragyna speciosa on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Fidesz on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From Gerda Arendt

... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks! North8000 (talk) 21:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Radio Free Asia on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations \| July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Fall of Constantinople on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 20:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

St. Joseph's Indian School

I tried to edit this article to establish a factual version and timeline cited and based on sources, and to clean up the sources, because sometimes the same article was referred to 3 times as if different ones. Yes, I should have asked permission first but got started early this morning. Elizium said I used incorrect formatting, and reverted edits where I had added Fr. to Hogebach. (I thought that and Rev. were pretty common for Catholic and Protestant clergy, respectively.) Some factual material wasn't included at all, such as the name of the college at Chamberlain or the number of students when St. Joseph's school started. If we could have a version that is more factual and cleaned up, it might make the Talk page more productive.Parkwells (talk) 16:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Parkwells: Sorry I didn't see this sooner because you put it my user page instead of my talk page. I've subsequently said there that you are a rock-star neutral expert editor and thanked you for your work there.North8000 (talk) 17:06, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, North8000 - must have been too annoyed at the time, so have moved it to its correct place. Thanks for all your work on the article, too.Parkwells (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000 and Parkwells:, I think you both have done good things with the article. It continues to be expanded with relevant material. I honestly appreciate you both. --ARose Wolf 19:13, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!North8000 (talk) 20:34, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:External links on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Scouting Newsletter: July 2021

WikiProject Scouting | July 2021

Things to watch for:

New: Newest articles
Alert: Article alerts
Continuing: To do

Other ways to participate:

--evrik ^(talk) 17:32, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page move without adequate notice for discussion

See my ping at Talk:History of American Indian schools#Scope of this article and potential American Indian school articles, where I have strongly suggested that you self-revert and apply the discussion template for suggested page moves. A note on talk, with a header that does not mention a potential page move, and then moving it yourself when no one has responded to you after four days (two of them over a weekend) is not appropriate. Follow Wikipedia policy for page moves. I have linked the policy and template at talk. Don't make others have to clean this up. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 21:23, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are implying policies that don't exist. What you linked is instructions for people who want to have somebody move pages for them, and not only that even that is in the multiple page moves section.Finally, even if it WAS applicable, it describes what I already did. As I said there, lets let editors weigh in and go with whatever is decided. North8000 (talk) 00:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Others have concurred that it was entirely proper. But again, let's just decide how it should end up and do that. North8000 (talk) 02:43, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hydropower on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done.North8000 (talk) 02:42, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Olivia Rodrigo on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:33, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 23:39, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2021 Cuban protests on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:War of annihilation on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for helping with the RFC I did try to clarify it more.Thelostone41 (talk) 13:34, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thelostone41: My pleasure. North8000 (talk) 17:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

mail from SB

Hello, North8000. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 11:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Optical telegraph on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:42, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 South Korean presidential election on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:36, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:1998 United States Capitol shooting on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Psychology on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nicki Minaj on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:57, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Amrullah Saleh on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 15:12, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:The New York Times on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Justine Kerfoot 1940.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Justine Kerfoot 1940.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:09, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source of the image is the current owner, Bruce Kerfoot who has granted the required license. He obtained ownership by inheriting it from the original owner, his mother, Justine Kerfoot.North8000 (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROPE

I have drafted an alternative version of this essay at User:Cullen328/sandbox/One last chance and invite your input. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:01, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks for the invitation. North8000 (talk) 23:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Emma Watson on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:07, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of titles and honours of George VI on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 19:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Vandana Shiva on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:32, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:33, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:African American studies on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Eritrea on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Julian Assange on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Malassezia on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

addition of a neuromorphic computing section to the article Artificial intelligence

@North8000

about the article Artificial intelligence :

I'd like to ask for consensus to add a section on specialized AI hardware.

the rationale for this is that talking about a type of software without the corresponding hardware makes the subject incomplete.

there are already Wikipedia articles on this subject which I will list below.

Neuromorphic engineering

Event camera

JAIC

Physical neural network

Memristor RJJ4y7 (talk) 14:23, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RJJ4y7: Thanks for the heads up. I've been gone but will be happy to go to discuss at the article page. North8000 (talk) 11:46, 13 October

2021 (UTC)

already started a section RJJ4y7 (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been nominated

You are invited to join the discussion at meta:Movement Charter/Affiliates by Region/North America. You have been nominated by User:RightCowLeftCoast, with meta:San Diego Wikimedians User Group, to be a region selector for North America (Canada, and the United States) for the Movement Charter selector committee. If you accept your nomination, please indicate it on the page. If you do not accept your nomination, please remove yourself from the list of potential selectors. Thanks in advance for your time regarding this nomination, and thanks for everything you have done so far on a Wikimedia project. RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 22:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RightCowLeftCoast: Thanks for the nomination. I don't fully understand this yet (including how to properly accept) but am happy to make my best effort.North8000 (talk) 11:43, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: Thanks for accepting the nomination. Within the next day the Wikimedia Foundation affiliates in Canada, and the United States, will vote on those nominees who have accepted their nominations or who self nominated. The majority vote getter will then be selected as the North American Region selector on the affiliates selection committee, who will then decide among themselves who shall be the Wikimedia Foundation affiliates Drafting Committee members.--RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 15:26, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: Thanks for volunteering your time! Here's a bit more context on the task you were nominated for -- this is a specific task to happen over the next 2 weeks to work with the other selectors who are chosen by the other regions of the world (as described here: meta:Movement_Charter/Drafting_Committee/Set_Up_Process#Selection_process to choose the 6-13 candidates you think are the best for the role of drafting the meta:Movement Charter. Here's the list of candidates you would choose from -- there are 70 and they are international, from all parts of the movement, so it will be a fair bit of review; here's some of the matrices developed so far. Each region gets to nominate a selector, so this is North America's process. The process of selecting candidates needs to wrap up by the beginning of November (the posted date is October 24 with announcement to happen by Oct 31), to coincide with the community vote on the candidates that will also be happening. So the task will be: read through the 70 candidates, and work with your 8 counterparts to decide who you think should take on the drafting/editing/conceptualization process that will result in the movement charter draft. This is complicated, let me know if you have questions! -- phoebe / (talk to me) 17:49, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good to learn your views, North8000. Can't tell if you've been following the Movement Charter discussion. For logistical reasons I have to vote soon at least tentatively. I will try to tune in to tonight's North America meeting and hear the discussion. -- econterms (talk) 19:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note that the affiliates have voted in another candidate but thanks again for being willing to volunteer! -- phoebe / (talk to me) 15:33, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Folk Music

Hello there, and thanks for the thanks (what a pun.) Anyways, since you are the main editor of the page as far as I can see, I listed a concern on the talk page. Would you be willing to comment, since nobody else is active? Cheers,-- • Apollo468• 22:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Happy to comment. North8000 (talk) 01:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:CRA International on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 18:09, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Brandon Brown (racing driver) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 18:29, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Oaktree Capital Management

Hello North8000. I posted an edit request at Talk:Oaktree Capital Management a few days ago, and was rejected without discussion. Of course I am slightly biased due to a COI, but there appears to have been some oversight and I'd love to get a second opinion. A quick look at the other editor's contributions makes it clear that I will likely need a mediator, and you seem to be someone who may be willing to help. If you have a moment to check it out, I would really appreciate it. Thanks! LeiaVOaktree (talk) 19:21, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@LeiaVOaktree:Happy to take a look. North8000 (talk) 19:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Indira Gandhi on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:31, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 12:53, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of countries by foreign-exchange reserves on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 20:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Loudoun County Public Schools on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Shusha on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 23:46, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nicki Minaj on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kathleen Stock on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:34, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:42, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kim Dae-jung on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:40, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Éric Zemmour on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:46, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Joy of Satan Ministries on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 13:13, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ghislaine Maxwell on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 14:20, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Jack Posobiec on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy belated Thanksgiving!

	Happy belated Thanksgiving!
	Better late than never... Happy holidays! Huggums537 (talk) 09:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Huggums537: Thanks! Have a great holidays! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:19, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RSP

You seem to be a bit confused about reliable sources, since you described content supported by The New York Times and The Washington Post as "fake news". I would suggest looking over WP:RSP to gain a better understanding of how these sources are treated on Wikipedia, since this might differ from your personal beliefs about them. –dlthewave ☎ 21:49, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dlthewave: What a complete insulting mis-statement or misunderstanding of what I said. If it's just latter and , please let me know and I'll be happy to discuss. North8000 (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for any offense or misunderstanding. What exactly did you mean by "giving legs to fake news that 'assault weapon' is some specific type of weapon"? I guess I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea that we shouldn't use the term/concept in a way that reliable sources do. I'd really like to understand where you're coming from so that we can try to reach consensus. –dlthewave ☎ 23:15, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are also RS's which quote originators which said that the term is invented to confuse (with military firearms) for political purposes, not to identify any type of firearm. My main goal is to avoid promulgating something that is objectively a falsehood, including statements that implicitly (falsely) state that it has a consistent meaning as a type of firearm. There are ways to increase coverage of the debates in this general area without propagating terminology falsehoods. They are vulnerable to attack by wikilawyering and so it would take a true joint effort by all concerned. In vague shorthand, it would be something like "persons and organizations are opposed to xxxxxxxxx style firearms (e.g. an AR-15) being available to the general public for the following reasons: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and use the term "assault weapons" to refer to those types of firearms.North8000 (talk) 23:44, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining. Could you point me to one of the sources that quotes the originators? I'd love to learn. –dlthewave ☎ 23:58, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some (quoted) content:

Sugarmann, who happens to be a native of Newtown, argued that the American public's inability to differentiate between automatic and semiautomatic weapons made it easier to get anti-gun legislation passed.

"The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons -- anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun -- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons," Sugarmann wrote.

Gun rights advocates agree that the term "assault weapons" has furthered the idea that semiautomatic weapons are the same as fully automatic assault rifles, which they contend are much more dangerous.

The gun rights lobby also argues that 1) the word "assault" connotes offense and illegality, while the vast majority of such guns are used in a lawful manner and for defense and 2) so-called assault weapons differ from other guns solely because of cosmetic changes like a pistol grip or a threaded barrel for a silencer -- not in the way they actually fire bullets."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/17/is-it-fair-to-call-them-assault-weapons/

North8000 (talk) 00:15, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed new draft for the Jon Baker page

About 2 months ago I shared a proposed draft to rework the Jon Baker page to remove promotionalism (addressing the advert tags) and make the page more up-to-date. I haven’t been able to find any editors willing to review the draft for consideration and was hoping you might be willing to take a look. Kindest. Daizypeach (talk) 13:24, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Daizypeach: Sure, I'd be happy to. North8000 (talk) 14:31, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are well! I wanted to check-in on your feedback regarding the latest round of edits I requested to the Jon Baker (producer) page. No rush, but let me know if it's still on your radar. Daizypeach (talk) 11:42, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Daizypeach: Thanks for the ping. I missed that you had responded to my request for an explicit definition of the proposed changes. More is at the article page and talk page. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 15:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking neutral tone suggestions for RfC

Hello North8000, Thank you for your comments on the Jack Posobiec RfC. I was wondering if you had any suggestions on how to re-word the RfC into a neutral concise tone regarding the lead paragraph? MaximusEditor (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MaximusEditor: Happy to go and see if I can help. North8000 (talk) 21:35, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Although this isn’t my main focus, I do think that RS’ing neutral labels could make it so the article reads as more NPOV. Maybe, put that after the current lede descriptions. (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2021 (UTC) (by Tylerf2022)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:PragerU on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 14:48, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Social fabric

This article was mostly a copy/paste/duplication of Social network, to which it has redirected. I reverted to the redirect. MB 14:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MB: Thanks. I didn't realize that. North8000 (talk) 18:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested updates

Hi North8000. My name is Daniel and I work for Sitel. A couple weeks ago I requested adding an acquisition and some updated infobox data to the Sitel page, but neither of the editors I pinged responded. I was wondering if you would be willing to take a look and consider making the edits if they are appropriate? DanSlavov (talk) 15:51, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'd be happy to give it a look. North8000 (talk) 18:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:John Diefenbaker on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:27, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Save Award

On behalf of the FAR coordinators, thank you, North8000! Your work on Great Lakes Storm of 1913 has allowed the article to retain its featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. You may display this FA star upon your userpage. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 03:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I'm honored and thanks! It was a pleasure working with everybody there! North8000 (talk) 14:12, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joyous Season

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Huggums537 (talk) 19:08, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Intellectual exchange

In retrospect, if I thought your point to be rather strange, I only just realized that you are somewhat correct, I reviewed some articles today and it occurred to me that I had just marked 3 articles as reviewed even though the references didn’t necessarily meet what would we consider as “reliable” as documented in WP:RS, but since they met the relevant SNG, it was a slam dunk review, after my reviews, my mind went straight to what you said. I believe the dynamics in “sourcing” or how sources work, or ought to work with SNG's are a discussion for another day. Celestina007 (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Celestina007: Thanks for the post. For me that particular discussion was on a simpler aspect of wp:notability. The top level guideline says that meeting the particular criteria is sufficient. At a more complex level, IMO the way that wp:notability actually works is a complex ecosystem not fully described in the guidelines. I wrote an essay which I think actually describes that, it is Wikipedia:How Wikipedia notability works. Finally there is the "what should it be? question. IMO the system documented at Wikipedia:How Wikipedia notability works mostly works but has a few problems, the biggest being:

Since much of it is complex and undocumented, it is confusing. Amongst other issues is that few understand it and it is unquotable when resolving specific problems
The SNG set the bar too low for sports figures (basically it's "did it for a living for at least one day") which makes Wikipedia flooded and imbalanced with those articles which is turn creats more secondary problems.
For highly encyclopedic topics which don't have their own SNG, it makes them too tough to get in. Actually (long story short) this actually falls under #1.

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are apt, I read the essay and it made a whole lot of sense to me and even helped me to understand certain nuances I have struggled with in the past. Furthermore, I want to point to your #2 point above, and say I agree with you a 100%. Celestina007 (talk) 22:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Keechant Sewell on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 04:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Enabling factors

Thanks for that great insight[4], I've renamed the section to Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes#Enabling_factors, the former section title "Proposed causes" seems to have generated much argumentation in the past, so this may be a step in the right direction. Probably the section lead sentence needs to be updated to reflect that new section title. --Nug (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nug: Thanks, I'm flattered. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC) North8000 (talk) 15:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (country-specific topics) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 23:06, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of political parties in Italy on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of political parties in Italy on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:58, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Involvement in the Drn

Hi North8000, sorry for the trouble, I might sound petulant, I know, however now I need to know in what form you intend to be called to participate in the Drn on Italian parties. Soon I intend to filea request to the Drn, so I need to indicate the users directly involved. I don't know if you prefer to be notified by ping within the discussion, but to facilitate the procedure it would be more practical to indicate you as an involved user (which is not a bad thing). Obviously I will respect your every decision :) --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 09:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Scia Della Cometa: Thanks for the message and it's no trouble. Happy to help there but that is my only care and capacity and so I don't want to be listed as involved. North8000 (talk) 18:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then I will not indicate you as an involved user, I trust in your participation. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, happy to help. North8000 (talk) 21:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious
Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thanks! North8000 (talk) 14:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Opinion polling for the 2022 Australian federal election on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback: Thanks

Thanks a lot for heeding my request. I just have no words. I'll always be here to return the favor :). Derivator2017 (talk) 20:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help. I wouldn't call it a favor, other than helping a new editor learn Wikipedia. Now you need to do what I suggested! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:42, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please really tell what's the issue with the page? It's similar to the one which you reviewed (i.e., Al Alia International Indian School). And yes kindly elaborate what you suggested because I have provided over 60 references and sources to make the page eligible for GNG. Derivator2017 (talk) 20:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What counts is articles by independent sources where the school is the subject of the article. I found one such reference in the article that I approved ( https://www.arabnews.com/node/227466). To be on firm ground, it needed two, but I gave you / it the benefit of the doubt. I found zero such references in the article which is at AFD (despite it having more references) So go find some articles by independent sources where the school is the subject of the article/coverage. North8000 (talk) 21:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'm pretty sure I might be able to get one. Well, if you don't mind, it'd be really great help if you could ping some of the Wikipedians in the discussion and at least ask them to vote keep or anything near to it. In the meantime, I'll try to find the sources you've asked me for. Because in my view saving the article from being thrown in trash bin is the first thing I am supposed to do right now. Derivator2017 (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk reader) @Derivator2017: Your request for North8000 to "ping some of the Wikipedians in the discussion and at least ask them to vote keep or anything near to it" violates WP:CANVASS. Wikipedia is not a platform for you to exploit. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Got it Derivator2017 (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think three articles, one from Arab News (https://www.arabnews.com/yara-school-backs-diabetes-initiative), the other from Saudi Gazette (http://saudigazette.com.sa/article/22836/Yara-celebrates-Childrens-Day-and-spreads-awareness-about-diabetes) and the last one from Press Reader (https://www.pressreader.com/saudi-arabia/arab-news/20120507/281994669507834) are completely dedicated to the school. Derivator2017 (talk) 21:39, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the entire screenshot of an Arab News article that was discussing international schools in Saudi Arabia. The only reason an entire column was dedicated to the school because it was among the top ranking schools Derivator2017 (talk) 21:42, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finding those three references was good. You should do two things with them:

Incorporate material from the reference in the article, and add the references for that material
Note the references in the discussion page at the AFD page.

Putting an image of the newspaper was a bad idea. I will be forced to delete that and will discuss in the edit summary. North8000 (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But be sure to use that newspaper article as a reference and also to discuss/ note it at AFD.North8000 (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: Alright, I did as you said. Kindly have a look at it in the AFD page. And, just letting you know that those references were already incorporated in the article, maybe you and the others weren't able to spot it due to the inducing amount of material included in the reference list. Derivator2017 (talk) 09:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I didn't notice those. North8000 (talk) 13:45, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Armenia on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WithdrawnNorth8000 (talk) 20:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ghurid dynasty on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RfC at Ghurid dynasty article

I have restarted the RfC to resolve the neutrality and clarity issues at Talk:Ghurid dynasty#RfC about the map in the infobox of the Ghurid dynasty article. You are welcome to post again there. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 13:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to and I did it. North8000 (talk) 14:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. I have worked on a caption per your request at Talk:Ghurid dynasty#RfC about the map in the infobox of the Ghurid dynasty article. Please see the caption under the large map in the middle of the thread. Best. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 06:36, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. Will do. North8000 (talk) 15:33, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Based on that I changed my "conditional "yes" to "yes". North8000 (talk) 15:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Queen Latifah on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

etiquette at talk pages (this is not a nasty-gram)

Just a note that I am unclear on the etiquette of something. I put my response to Johnuniq above your response to me. I'm unclear if that was the right thing to do or not.

The situation before:

Me
JU
You

Now both JU and you were responding to me. I chose to respond to JU immediately below his post, leading to:

Me
JU
Me again
You

Your response is getting pushed further and further away from the post of mine that it was responding to. I wish it weren't. But if I respond to JU below your post, that might also be confusing. I don't know if there is a good way to handle this. I'll add that if you do know of a good way, I don't mind you reordering the posts. Adoring nanny (talk) 05:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Adoring nanny: Thanks for the post. The general answer is that the format is going fine there; the reader just needs to understand how talk indents are used to make sense out of it. Responses have one more indent that the post they are responding to. Let's say you make a post and there are two responses directly to your post, John's response #1 and Mary's response #2. They both have a single indent. Then Sally responds to John's response. She writes just below John's response #1, thus pushing Mary's response further down the page and farther away from your post that she was responding to. If you go down from your post, single indents indicate that they were a response to your post (even if they are far away) until Larry comes along with a post that is not indented at all and so is not identified as a response to your post.

The above best answers your question and identifies the main concept so perhaps you should not read any further because I'm going to bring up a different secondary thing. But here goes. Posts with no indent are thus not identified as responses to any specific post but instead are identified as just relating to the OP and section. In this case, your OP is both. So my 'no indent" tied my post to the section and heading, not to your specific post. But in this case, the section/heading/OP and your post are one and the same so it makes no difference.

Hope that helps. Happy to discuss more if you wish. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Makes perfect sense, thanks a lot! Adoring nanny (talk) 15:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Hey @North8000:, I would like to express immense gratitude from the bottom of my heart for helping me out in that tangled place. I firmly believe that the outcome would've been really different had you not heeded to my plea. I will always be grateful for your selfless contribution for saving three months of my hardwork and guiding me. I would also like to apologize if I had unintentionally pestered you a little bit. I just liked your way of simplifying complicated and convoluted instructions. Regards and have a nice day. Derivator2017 (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Derivator2017: It was my pleasure and certainly no problem at all. Wikipedia editing is an alternate universe where much is different than real life and which takes an immense amount of experience to understand. My favorite thing to do is help new editors that are having trouble with that and so I was very happy to do it. My suggestion is to keep improving that article which would also be a good learning process for you. Happy to help with tips there too if you are interested. North8000 (talk) 23:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: I am honestly glad that I was able to learn something new and I hope I might someday be in your position to help someone out as well. This incident shall be a forever remainder for me as long as I remain on this platform. As far as the article is concerned, I'm consistently working on it to avoid another deletion tag. And lastly, sorry for the late reply. Derivator2017 (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article hasn't been so far verified by any user. Can you do it ? Derivator2017 (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 14:25, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Vision therapy on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus v. Christ

Per the canonical gospels, Historicists assert that these literary narratives featuring god-Jesus contain biographical data for the historical personage Jesus b. Joseph/Pantera that can be extracted.

For Biblicists, the gospels are fictional narrative literature and do not support a historical figure but a historical Jesus of some sort probably existed.

Christ is a second-god, is the only-begotten son of First-god (YHWH), was incarnated in a virgin (Mary) and crucified for us. The Nicene Creed, the most widely accepted confession of the Christian faith (but not the only one), explains that this god will appear on Earth at the end of days to judge the living and the dead.

--2db (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@2db: Thanks for the post. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:42, 6 February 2022 (UTC) North8000 (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of fictional characters with disabilities on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Confederate States of America on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 11:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Continental Association on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PragerU “Think Tank” request.

Apologies for not being specific on the last part, and being late (I was busy with something else :[). My reasoning for adding “think tank” to the lead, is that the ‘The Gravel Institute’ Is considered a think tank, and in the ‘The Gravel Institute’ Wikipedia article it even calls ‘PragerU’ a ‘think tank’. Also the two organizations are almost identical (the only difference being political approaches) in the way they produce their shows and videos. So since ‘The Gravel Institute‘ is considered a think tank, it only makes sense for ‘PragerU’ to be considered a think tank.
Now I do have to say that this does need a Wikipedia consensus, to consider ‘PragerU’ a think tank (as FormalDude advised). But of course the choice is always at the hands of the community. Regards 68.97.131.85 (talk) 19:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@68.97.131.85:Thanks for the post. I'll take a peek. North8000 (talk) 13:43, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Yes on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 16:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Yes on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Brian Rose (podcaster) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cone North8000 (talk) 14:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Taiwan on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zdnf

Thanks for your help with this investigation. I was disappointed that check user was turned down as there are likely live socks and sleeper accounts, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Atlantic306:Thanks for the note. I don't think that they had a choice....I don't think that they retain the IP data that long. With the current account's pattern of deletions from ~1,500 articles in just a few months, the bigger worry may be a new next replacement account. Thanks for your vigilance and expertise, perhaps you'll be able to spot a new replacement account. :-) Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you're right I've been told there is no info remaining from 2017. If you see a likely sockpuppet please let me know, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please reconsider your reverts of my edits to articles on wolf and bear attacks

Hi, you did this to my edits to List of wolf attacks in North America and List of fatal bear attacks in North America:

undo removal of large amount of long-standing information

However, the "information" I removed merited removal; it was irrelevant and presented in a sexist way. Much of it is unsourced and likely incorrect. It's not correct to put gender/sex labels (male, female, ♀, ♂) unless the person self-identifies with the labels. Besides, gender/sex is irrelevant to wolf or bear attack victimhood. The unstated purpose of including these labels here, where they are ascribed without consent and irrelevant to the topic, is to bolster patriarchy. (posted by 65.128.60.8)

@65.128-60.8: Thanks for the post. What that means is that the next step is to discuss your proposed large removals at the talk pages of those articles. Sincerely North8000 (talk) 18:03, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Extra-parliamentary on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:21, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OR at Black Rifle Coffee Company

This is not supported by the source given [5]. At first I blamed this on a racist IP and am shocked and immensely disappointed to find out it was you. Political POV pushing which directly contradicts the given source is not something I expected of you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:59, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Horse Eye's Back:Thanks for the post and the indirect compliment mixed in with the complaint. :-) The edits should be discussed.....would you like to do it here or at the article? The Wikilisting of the source that you are referring to is "Editors consider Salon biased or opinionated, and its statements should be attributed." And to double up on that, the Salon page that you are referring tow is not even about the event being described in that sentence. Certainly we need need a better source and one that is about the topic of that description. You seem to be implying some pretty nasty stuff about the editor personally from merely making the very defensible edit.....that has no basis and is out of line. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Flag of Alabama on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:07, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 23:39, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ssup

Hey North8000, it's me, Derivator2017. I hope you're doing fine. I was low-key inactive on this platform a lot lately due to my exams. So, just here to check up on ya as they're over now. I hope everything's fine with you and you continue to contribute to change the dimension we know as Wikipedia because. Such platforms really need people like you. Have a nice day ! Derivator2017 (talk) 16:17, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Derivator2017: Thanks for the note and the compliment. I hope that things are going great for you!. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:34, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Azov Battalion on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of International Organization for Standardization standards, 1–4999. on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Lee Soon-ok on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on Baden Powell merge vote

Hi, I was just reading your comment on this merger discussion, it seems to me that your comment is a qualified do not merge, but your vote is "Weak merge". Is it a mistake or have I misunderstood?

All the best

--Boynamedsue (talk) 07:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Boynamedsue: Thanks for pointing out my error. I'll go fix it. North8000 (talk) 13:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hey, I want to thank you personally for the effort you invested in the Founding Fathers dispute - and away from the embarrassingly and ridiculously long exchanges in which I have been a major perp. I believe our own disagreements have been primarily, as the character in Cool Hand Luke put it, a "failure to communicate". I am certain that if the two of us were working together on a subject of mutual interest we might disagree here or there, but within a brief exchange we'd be seeing eye to eye.

What has come across, though, is your good spirit, as reflected by your desire to help. I just quoted the Dylan song "The Ballad of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest" to of all people, a priest yesterday. The closing lines: "The moral of this story, the moral of the song, is simply that one should never be where one does not belong. So when you see your neighbor carrying somethin', help him with his load, and don't go mistaking Paradise for that home across the road". I live a fair part of my life by that, helping a woman in a supermarket reach a box on the top shelf, letting another driver get in front of me or listening to a friend's lament. That's the spirit I mean, the desire to help others with nothing else to gain. So thanks and I do hope we meet again. Allreet (talk) 06:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allreet: Thanks for that gracious, eloquent and thoughtful post. On your second paragraph, that is not only a more altruistic way to live, it is also a more fun way to live. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 07:31, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:College of Policing on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Also see below. North8000 (talk) 13:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Founding Fathers - the "back story"

Thought I'd share this while it's on my mind. Local history drew me to Wikipedia. I had worked on some projects for our county's Chamber of Commerce and Historical Society a few decades ago. Using that background, I wrote two articles for Wikipedia on a Founding Father who signed the Declaration and whose house is a couple miles from mine. In updating these articles in January, I did some research on a colonial leader who had been associated with "my founder". I then looked up his Wikipedia article to learn he was considered a Founding Father. That struck me as extremely odd since he had been convicted of treason in the 1780s and was probably the highest ranked figure to earn the dishonor. Earlier, as speaker of the Pennsylvania assembly, he had signed the Continental Association, but as an ardent loyalist, he went on to become an aide to General Howe and then oversaw Philadelphia during the British occupation in 1777-78. After the British abandoned the city, he fled to England where he led the loyalist-in-exile cause. Through the article's edit history and some other forensics, I determined who had bestowed the title and on what basis (a single, misinterpreted article). It only took three months to straighten that out. The upside is I've learned a great deal about the founding and have gained a new interest. Allreet (talk) 13:02, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allreet: Thanks for that interesting background. It's also a pretty strong example of why you want to be careful / avid overreach in assigning the FF term. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Galloway, as a signer of the Continental Association, earned the status. I tried to explain the similarity to O.J. Simpson to Allreet, events later did not remove his name from the record books, the Heisman Trophy, or the Football Hall of Fame. Wikipedia does not follow cancel culture illogic. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:55, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Allreet:@Randy Kryn: I enjoy the discussion here, and being on a sidebar point I don't think that it misplaces discussion best consolidated elsewhere. Given that IMO the RFC is ambiguous in two areas (regarding mere presence of a name in the article and also what to do with the article) and thus would be an unresolved mess for a long time, possibly an attempted quick attempt at a short cut to a solution between the two main protagonists might be good here. My idea would be to add coverage of the term "Founding Fathers" to the article, make it clear that those in only the bigger group are generally not considered to be within that capitalized term group, do the same elsewhere in the article, remove the capitalization of the "F" in fathers in the title. Then you have a broader founding fathers functional article (where mere presence of a name in the article says little) and within that coverage of the Founding Fathers term and that it generally refers to the smaller group. Allreet, I (and it looks like the RFC) tend to agree with you on the narrow question, but the next stage would be deciding if that narrow decision should dictate everything regarding this article. And if the answer to that ends up being "yes", that would entail blowing up this entire article and reducing it to being an article about or through the lens of a 20th century term. VS what I proposed above being possibly 95% as good from your standpoint.

We'd shouldn't have a long discussion here away from the main venue, but if this is a shortcut to a final solution between the two main protagonists, maybe maybe that would be a good thing. Not perfect for either of you, but close enough for both of you, and skips the lengthy mess that I think that this article is inevitably headed into. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about not having an extended discussion here, nor did I intend to open one. At the moment, three such discussions are taking place. One is the DRN, which is temporarily on hold in deference to the second forum, the RFC. The third is the Founding Fathers talk page where we are allowed to discuss whatever issues we want to bring up. Allreet (talk) 04:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Recapping, I just indulged a bit to in essence propose a possible shortcut to quickly settle what will otherwise be months of future discussions. North8000 (talk) 13:20, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Months of future discussion" - I certainly hope not. My expectation is that another RFC may be needed, but only to rid the articles in question of all of the unsourced edits made to the FF page and 50+ other articles in July and October of last year. Other implications, intended actions, possible improvements, and so forth need not be addressed at the moment. Allreet (talk) 14:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that I'm wrong. :-) North8000 (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:College of Policing

Just in case you didn't see my reply. The RFC, including the diff in question, is at the very bottom of the page. You commented on the wrong section. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll look at and fix. North8000 (talk) 21:21, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Patrisse Cullors on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:National Recording Registry on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 13:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol on its last legs from Jimbo's talk page

It occurs to me that if the community stops bullying and banning the editors doing the work, that some of these backlogs wouldn't be as bad. But when they top editors all end up with targets on their backs, you end up with backlogs. 173.71.200.195 (talk) 17:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post! North8000 (talk) 16:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of political parties in Italy on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Big Pharma

Good luck in improving this article. Various editors have commented on how it is advocacy that equates criticism of any aspect of the pharmaceutical industry as conspiracism. The only substantial source for the article is a short article by a non-expert in a journal for writers for pharmaceutical companies. The rest of it is just a coatrack for entering any conspiracy theories that reference the pharmaceutical industry.

On the positive side, the article only had 149 views last month. Also, it's too one-sided to be effective propaganda. Like the original source, it's preaching to the choir.

TFD (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@The Four Deuces: Thanks for the post. I wasn't planning on diving in deep there. I thought you were fixing it. :-) :-) I was hoping to just give a few thoughts. At the 30,000' view, which do you think could be fixes?:

Delete article
Rename article to something matching it's current content, like "Criticisms of the pharmaceutical industry"
Strip out the content that is not RS'd identified as conspiracy theories
________________(Another idea)

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of political parties in Italy on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. I've already spent a lot of time there trying to help. North8000 (talk) 11:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

done North8000 (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hermann Göring on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 20:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, North8000

Thank you for creating Monochrome-astrophotography-techniques.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for your work. I left a detailed note at the article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Draft:Erika Brady

Your thoughts on this subject? FloridaArmy (talk) 17:45, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FloridaArmy: IMO it would survive in article space. I did not analyze in depth but it looks like it has a couple GNG sources. The 'official" guidelines don't have have a way to jointly consider prominence in a multitude of areas which she has. The folks are AFC are extra cautious, usually rejecting any that aren't a slam-dunk by the book. Because their only alternative is to go out on a limb a bit. North8000 (talk) 18:17, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you for your positive review on my article. Kelhuri (talk)

It was an "Occupation" & the occupation is what Ukraine Insurgent Army waged war against

The below is a short list of historians & Museums who use "occupied" to describe the Soviet occupation of western Ukraine after Stalin & Hitler invaded Poland. Remember, Poland took 'west Ukraine' for themselves after Poland defeated Ukraine in 1919 in the Polish-Ukraine war - so in the eyes of Ukraine Insurgent Army, that part of Poland belonged to Ukraine. The English-to-Ukraine translation of "Ukraine Insurgent Army" = "Ukrayinsʹka Povstansʹka Armiya" (UPA) & that's why they're called "UPA." UPA was army literally created to wage warfare against Soviet occupation of western Ukraine. That's what the article is about, and the title should reflect that.

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: "the German-Soviet Pact was signed in August 1939. It paved the way for the joint invasion and occupation of Poland by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that September. The pact was an agreement of convenience between the two bitter ideological enemies." [6]
Museum of the History Of Polish Jews: "the eastern territories of Poland were captured on 17th September 1939 by the Soviet army. The authorities in occupation tried to legalize this situation."[7]
Historian Christoph Mick writes, "Soviet occupation policy in Lviv was based first and foremost on socio-political and power-political categories and only second on ethno-political ones."[8]
Historian Timothy Snyder writes, "Russian murder and abduction of local Ukrainian elites today resembles Soviet and German policy during their joint occupation of Poland in 1939." [9]
Historian Timothy Snyder: "Between 1939 and 1941, as they jointly occupied Poland, Moscow and Berlin each sought to destroy its national elites." [10]
Historian Timothy Snyder, "During the consolidation of National Socialism and Stalinism (1933-1938), the joint German-Soviet occupation of Poland (1939-1941), and then the German-Soviet war (1941-1945), mass violence of a sort never before seen in history was visited upon this region. The victims were chiefly Jews, Belarusians, Ukrainians, Poles, Russians, and Balts, the peoples native to these lands." [11]

Best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BetsyRMadison: Thanks so much for the post. I'm trying to be more of mere navigator / facilitator at the article deferring to you experts at the article who know far more than me rather than having an opinion deriving a finding. But this kind of learning is nice and helps me do that. So, pre WWII and early WWII the term was "occupation". What word would you use for the other periods that are within the scope of the current article? Thanks again. North8000 (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: For the scope of this article, which is UPA's war against Soviet occupation - the word I'd use is occupation because it's the word historians use when discussing UPA waging war against Soviet occupation. Here's a brief explanation (bear with me): this article is not about all of the many different Ukrainian nationalists groups that battled & waged war with Russia (Soviets) from 1917-1991 in order to gain independence. This article is only, about UPA being an army created to fight against Soviet occupation. That was their mission & that's what/who they fought against. Period. Period.
And, as this article used to point out, OUN created the UPA as an army to wage war against Soviet occupation that began in 1939 in western Ukraine- but an editor removed that very important fact and they shouldn't have.
So, in short, the article is about a small pocket of time, that began swirling in western Ukraine, and an army, UPA, without a country, waging war specifically against Soviet occupation. And the fact that their battles had to last from 1941-late 1950s until the Soviets finally wiped them (UPA) out does not change the fact that: UPA was an army created to wage war against Soviet occupation. Period. That was their mission & that's what/who they fought against. Period.

As an aside, in international law, a territory is considered “occupied” when it's placed under the authority of the hostile belligerent. From 1922-1991 Ukraine had been placed under the authority of hostile belligerent (Soviets & their Red Army) and Ukraine waged war with them the entire time, but that is not the scope of this article. This article has a very limited scope: UPA war against Soviet occupation.
Here's brief & very sloppy history of the Soviet occupation of Ukraine.

1) From 1917-1991 Ukraine waged wars (plural) with Russia/Soviets for Independence until U.S.S.R fell in 1991.

2) In 1919 western Ukraine fell to Poland & eastern Ukraine fell to Soviets

3) So, starting in 1919, a Ukraine Nationalists group inside Poland's western Ukraine, called OUN, became antagonistic to Poland for occupying western Ukraine.

4) From here down is the very important part & is the scope of the article: Because OUN was only concerned with west Ukraine (at that time), they didn't give a shit about Soviets (yet).

5) OUN inside Poland's western Ukraine only started giving a shit about Soviets in 1939, when Stalin collaborated with Hitler, invaded Poland, occupied western Ukraine & booted Poland out. (Let that sink in).

8) Then, in 1941-42 (depending on who you talk to) UPA was created to be OUN's army to oust Russian/Soviet occupation.

9) In 1941, Hitler booted out Soviets, UPA cheered 'Yippi! Our liberators saved the day!' so that's when OUN's Stepan Bandera declared Ukraine independent; that declaration pissed Hitler off so Hitler had Bandera put in a Nazi concentration camp. (Yikes! Not really the liberators OUN was hoping for.)

10) In 1944 Soviets boot Hitler out, OUN-UPA freak out and that's when all the waring-hell really starts to break loose between UPA & Soviets. (The article used to have that in it, but it was removed - and it should not have been.)

11) Sometime in late 1950s (around 1959-ish) Soviets finally obliterate the army UPA.

12) Summary: The article is about a pocket of time that an army UPA waged war against Soviet/Red Army occupation.

Sorry for the length of this & sorry it's a sloppy version of history, but believe it or not, I left out a ton of stuff. Thanks for being you, you're a great editor to edit with. Best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 23:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: PS. The term historian Timothy Snyder uses to describe this period, 1944 when Soviets booted Hitler out of western Ukraine is "second Soviet occupation." [12] And that fact used to be in the article, but an editor removed it and they should not have. Anyway, if wiki wants to use terms our historians sources use; then we'll use "occupation" and describe the "2nd occupation" (that historians call it) somewhere in the body. Or, if wiki wants to deviate from sources, ignore sources, and instead re-write history in the false-words "editors" like or dislike; then "occupation" won't be used. I know the history, our readers don't. I'd like our readers to learn facts from the historians, like I did. Best wishes to you & yours, BetsyRMadison (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Flavan-3-ol on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 Buffalo shooting on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 12:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, North8000

Thank you for creating Flag of Orania.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Notes from Preliminary New Page Patrol review. Thanks fpor your work. IMO does not have the coverage and resultant content to be a separate article. IMO it would be good to merge this into the Orania article. I did not do any disposition, just left this note and the tag. Either way, thanks for your work andwish you happy editing. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, North8000

Thank you for creating George Hunter (footballer, born 1996).

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for your work. IMO does not meet WP:Notability under either GNG or the SNG. Suggest merging into the team article. Other than this note and tag, I did not do any dispositions. Either way, happy editing! North8000 (talk) 13:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Killing of Brittanee Drexel on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, North8000

Thank you for creating Cult of the Damned.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Notes from preliminary New Page Patrol review. IMO it needs to add and use 1-2 independent sources that discuss the band in depth. I just added ta and this note hopefully to build towards that.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, North8000

Thank you for creating Cult of the Damned.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Notes from preliminary New Page Patrol review. IMO it needs 1-2 independent sources with in-depth coverage of the band added.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 12:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cult of the Damned

Hi!

Hope you're well!

I created the page Cult of the Damned that was tagged as possibly not notable. I think it meets the notability guidelines, as a fairly experienced editor. I just wanted to know your reasoning. When I created the article, I looked at WP:MN and, in my interpretation, Cult of the Damned has:

1. "released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable)."

They're on Blah Records who have been approved by new page patrol and are 100% independently notable.

2. "Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country"

https://www.wordplaymagazine.com/blog-1/2019/3/4/live-review-cult-of-the-damned-jazz-cafe-camden

https://www.wordplaymagazine.com/blog-1/2019/4/16/interview-stinkin-slumrok-amp-bill-shakes-cult-of-the-damned

https://ukhh.com/lee-scott-cult-of-the-damned/

Three established sources all mentioning a national concert tour.

What do you think of my take here? Would love to know your thoughts.

Thanks,

The Flying Spaghetti Monster! 12:41, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@The Flying Spaghetti Monster: Thanks for the post. What I think is that you are right and that the tag is un-warrented. I think what happened is that you know this situation including the sources better than I do,. combined with the non-English source, plus New Page Patrol is a sinking ship regarding the backlog and I've been trying to get a lot of reviews done to help. I'll go fix things at the article and tag it as reviewed.Sorry for any grief. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No worries at all, these things happen! Thanks for being straight up with your reply, much appreciated. And appreciate your new page patrolling efforts, keep it up! The Flying Spaghetti Monster! 17:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on Anti-Soviet resistance by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army RM

Thanks for all of your work at Talk:Anti-Soviet resistance by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army herding cats and getting the article moved to a much better title. — AjaxSmack 15:21, 19 May 2022 (UTC) @AjaxSmack: Thanks and my pleasure. I left a note there that I'm ready to leave and leave it to you experts. Or if there are any big open question which I might try to help navigate, I'd be happy to help more. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:The Kashmir Files on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you really think that attack on me was acceptable? I wouldn't let an attack on you like that stand

It contributed nothing to the discussion and by reinserting it you appear to be supporting it. Looking at the editor's posts in 2020 when he was last active, his comments aren't surprising. I see I gave him several warnings then also. Doug Weller talk 15:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I screwed up. I failed to notice that it was directed at an individual; I'll revert myself. North8000 (talk) 15:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Please accept my apologies. North8000 (talk) 15:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We all make mistakes, miss things, etc. Doug Weller talk 15:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller:It started with a focus on the rationale on the deletion which didn't mention that and then I didn't review closely enough. North8000 (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Brie Larson on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of best-selling albums on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael wood deletion

Hi north8000 Iv written this message a couple times I’m new to wiki and not sure where to put it aha. Iv seen you nominated Michael wood cinematography for deletion and im interested why and would like to see if there’s anything I can do to improve the page. Thank you! Redtex4 (talk) 02:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Redtex4: The question of the moment is whether or not the subject meets WP:Notability for existence as a seperate article rather than quality of the article. (and BTW I'm just trying to do my New Page Patrol job properly) The best thing to do regarding that would be to find independent sources that write about him in some depth and incorporate them and material from them in the article. Since this will probably get decided in 1-2 weeks, if you're running out of time, just find the sources and list / describe them (and provide links if on line) that the AFD page. Let me know if I can help with any other guidance or clarification. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 03:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaa ok I see thank you. I had read about notability and was hoping the references I included was enough I fully understand if not there is only a couple. I will try and find some more independent articles I think there was something else in the British cinematographer magazine. How should I incorporate these sources/articles into the Wikipedia page. Thanks again! Redtex4 (talk) 03:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC) Aha ok thank you I’m away right now but will get on that from Monday. Thanks again for the help this is all quite new to me! Redtex4 (talk) 10:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(As a preface, the quantity of references is secondary. What's far more important is finding 1-2 independent published sources that discuss him in some depth.) Now, to answer your question, find things that the independent sources said about him and put that material into the article (in your own words......don't copy it in) and put the sources that you found in as references. Again , if you can't get that done within a week, just find the sources and list / describe them (and provide links if on line) that the AFD page. Whether or not such sources exist is the main question of the moment. North8000 (talk) 03:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi north, thanks for the help on this iv done some reading and realised this page definitely deserves to be deleted for not meeting notable person rules. I won't in time before deletion but if I am able to find some independent sources and more information could I remake the page at a later date or would this not be allowed? Cheers again for the help! Redtex4 (talk) 22:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Redtex4: Yes you can. For most situations you can simply recreate the article. But I'd make sure that you are on pretty firm ground regarding wp:notability before you do that. If you think you'd need just a little extra time to find those sources, you can ask for it at the AFD and I'd support you on that (just ping me) Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just so I can relax about it and do it in my free time I don't think I'll request a time extention. Is there a way to move the page back into draft or something similar so I can work on it over more time or should I just start a new draft from scratch. Thanks, Redtex4 (talk) 23:09, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think so. I'll try to get that done.North8000 (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Redtex4: I looked and it's too late, it got deleted.If you are easily able to start over in a draft area, I'd suggest that. You can also request that it get undeleted and more to a draft space. I'm sure they'll say yes, but am not fluent enough on the details and I don't know if there is any backlo on requests. If it comes up, you can say7 that the person who initiated the AFD supports your request. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:10, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cecile Paul Simon Article

Hi North8000,

Thanks for your kind remark about the Cecile Paul Simon article. It’s nice to get positive feedback! T. E. Meeks (talk) 22:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Debt Recovery Tribunal.

Hi North8000. Thanks for your time and effort in reviewing this article and giving feedback. If you feel tha is important you can proceed and do so. Gardenkur (talk) 00:08, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Railway Claims Tribunal

Hi North8000. Thanks for your time and effort in reviewing this article and giving feedback. If you feel tha is important you can proceed and do so. Gardenkur (talk) 00:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maryanne Oktech

Hello! Thanks for the heads up on Maryanne Oktech. Every prior Survivor winner has an article on the English Wikipedia. Until a new player wins a season, they usually just redirect to the list article that houses every player name unless they have other notoriety. Someone will probably try to recreate the page soon and hopefully it will meet guidelines. I will probably not be the one to expand it unless I feel inspired. Red Director (talk) 00:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Red Director: Thanks for the message. I just do my best to do the job properly. In addition to the guidelines I do look to wp:outcomes for common practice. Your post sounds like useful information but I did not understand what you meant. Could you clarify? Thanks. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: Sorry for the confusing wording. I was referring to this list article as what all non-notable players redirect to. It was thought that the player should redirect to their respective season but the sheer amount of players that have played multiple times made the decision to redirect here the easier one. Now, about Maryanne Oktech, per this template, every winner has a Wikipedia article in the mainspace. I originally made Maryanne as a redirect while the season was going on and did not expand on her article. Some other editors did after the fact. The other 41 winners having an article is my only rationale for her having a page in the mainspace. I will leave that up to you and other editors down the line. Thanks for getting back. Red Director (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Red Director: Thanks. I also have no strong opinion....again, just trying to do my NPP job properly. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Robb Elementary School shooting on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 13:05, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beach gear (ship salvage) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Beach gear (ship salvage), is not suitable 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: The article is only five minutes old. I have many references and am adding them, albeit interrupted by this post. :-) You really need to look closer before you do these things. :-) North8000 (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's what draft space and user space are for. (Article space is for articles, not for half-formed articles.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: What you are implying is not correct. Within 5 minutes the article was not only OK for initial entry into article space but also suitable to make it through NPP. Then they get developed by the community. North8000 (talk) 17:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zeev Zohar

Thank you! In the HEbrew wikipedia I wrote many articles about chess, I add sometimes also on the English one. --Yoavd (talk) 17:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoavd: Keep up the good work! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Economic Freedom Fighters on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Observation

Thanks for patrolling FabFitFun, the latest of my rapid article output intended to get me access to the helper script. I was told last year that I don't have enough articles under my belt to get the script, and so have been creating a lot of articles lately to meet the threshold. During this, I noticed that a lot of inexperienced people are patrolling. See Talk:Cue Health and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cue Health. Hatchens was just blocked Special:Contributions/Hatchens, and now I'm up against Ari T. Benchaim, the creator of this article just last year: Draft:Golden Sunrise Nutraceutical, Inc.. I'm not responding to the nomination because I'm hoping that others will chastise him/her for their poor judgement, but we'll see. TechnoTalk (talk) 06:16, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoTalk: Thanks for the post. A lot there which I'd need to learn more about before attempting to comment. As noted, the article was AFD'd before I even looked at it. When an article is at AFD it goes off the NPP "to do" list and so as noted my marking of the article was (only) to implement that. Happy editing! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:06, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for patrolling. I wasn't really expecting anything - just venting I guess that someone can AfD an article like FabFitFun while writing one about a company that is clearly just in the news for a single event. TechnoTalk (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:United States on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question - flagging AfDs

Hiya. I notice you flag AfDs as resulting from NPP. Do you find that helps/encourages people to be more easy going? Just wonderin' :) Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexandermcnabb: I do it because I think that it is helpful to provide context and also helps the respondents by letting them know that they aren't dealing with some more complex people situation. And other than the general goal of wanting to have AFD's get decided correctly, I don't have a goal of a particular result for one I take to AFD. I just want to do the NPP job properly, and once one goes to AFD, it has been "handed off" for the next group of volunteers to handle. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Dear North8000. I thank you for your comments and time for reviewing this article. Looking forward to connect with you more and working for growth of Wikipedia in public platform. Thanks again. Gardenkur (talk) 02:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: My pleasure. Those articles are highly enclyclopedic topics. North8000 (talk) 09:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks & Help

Dear North8000. I would like to say thank you for your kind words upon reviewing a number of pages I have created. It is greatly appreciated. (There are others you might want to cast your your eye over such as John Dearth, Tariq Yunus and Rio Fanning.)

Are you good at getting draft pages into mainspace? If so, the following could be looked at:

Keep up the good work.Silurian25 (talk) 12:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post and your work. My wiki-minutes are already spread too thin to be getting into drafts but I'd be happy to look at those three. I tend to be a bit tougher on ones where I was asked. :-) Happy editing! North8000 (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I marked the first and third as reviewed. For Tariq (with off line sources) I'd have to do more research than I'm able to do right now to be comfortable with marking as reviewed. Happy editing! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Heat of combustion on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Response regarding consensus

Regarding these edits: I had assumed your response was to Beeblebrox, but after I noticed you had adjusted your list nesting level, I'm not sure now. If your comments were in response to me, then I've failed to be clear. I agree that the presence of some editors objecting to the implementation of a process isn't an indication that a new consensus is required to proceed with the process. isaacl (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaacl:Thanks for the post. I meant it as a response to the concept in Beeblebrox's post, but made a mistake and added one too many colons. Then I immediately saw my mistake and fixed it. I agree 100% with your post. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Because it's currently nested as one list level below my comment, it seems like a response to me, which is slightly confusing with the generic "That's like saying" reference that could be referring to my comment. I appreciate the clarification. isaacl (talk) 21:08, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaacl: Thanks for pointing that out so graciously.....that I had it wrong even after I "fixed" it. So now I think I really fixed it. :-) North8000 (talk) 21:17, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know some people's style is to continue a thread of conversation by replying to the last person in the chain, even if they're actually responding to an earlier comment. (If anyone reading this likes this convention, it's helpful in those cases to make an explicit reference to the earlier comment in the prose.) Thanks for adjusting the nesting on the talk page. isaacl (talk) 21:23, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Vladimir (name) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 9, 2022, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 11:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for taking the extra step to leave nice notes on editors' talk pages when you've reviewed an article they created. It's really encouraging, especially for newer editors, to hear that somebody appreciated the work they did. Schazjmd (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Schazjmd: My pleasure!

Politeness and Respect

@North8000: In contrast to your colleague valareee or whatever her name is (with regards to the potential deletion of Malimooju) I just wanted to say that I am pleased with how respectful you've been and am thankful for how understanding you've been. I don't know why that woman has her knickers in a knot but she's extremely rude and I'm rather peeved off about it. Can you provide me with information regarding how to submit an official complaint about a moderator? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eagleye1001 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk reader) @Eagleye1001: So in the past eight years on Wikipedia you hadn't learned that we have admins, not moderators? This isn't a 1995-era BBS and this website is run by volunteers, so I'm not sure how "official" you think your complaint should be. The people who own the servers don't care. You could waste your breath at WP:AN but I can guarantee you the situation would not resolve to your satisfaction. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:50, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Slip up of words. Not the answer I was expecting but thanks for being straight with me regardless! Eagleye1001 (talk) 22:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Eagleye1001: That wasn't me who answered you. North8000 (talk) 23:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My advice is let it go. Spend more time in Wikipedia and figure out how this alternate universe works. And have some fun while doing that. North8000 (talk) 00:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 12:04, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:North Carolina on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page Curation notices aren't any use if the editor who actually started the article isn't getting them

You need to have some sort of manual oversight about sending Page Curation notices to the editor who actually created the content on an article, because you have left me three notices about pages I did not create in the past month alone. What use are these messages if the editor who actually started the content isn't getting your feedback, which usually consists of "nice work" (really helpful, by the way)? I have previously raised this with you and you are still doing it. Perhaps you should go through whom you have left Page Curation notices for and actually check if they are the editor who started the content. IIRC, you said last time that I should raise this with whomever created the Page Curation tool, but how do you not seem to have an issue with leaving a message for the wrong editor? They're of no use to me. Actually do some manual oversight and check to make sure they're sent to the right editor. Ss112 02:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It went to you because you were the one who technically started the page. Sorry if it went to you (and them) rather than the one who developed the bulk of the content. Hopefully your experience of getting a misplaced compliment was more pleasant than getting chewed out for sending a misplaced one. Possibly you could come help at NPP. We are struggling with a huge backlog and would love to get caught up so that we can take deeper and more leisurely looks at articles. North8000 (talk) 02:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, North8000

Thank you for creating Executive Order 14070.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good start. The provision section could use some pretty heavy re-work. The wording sounds like PR type characterizations rather than saying what's in the order. I marked it as reviewed. Happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 02:41, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of Danish supercentenarians on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Hello, I'm NeverTry4Me. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jyotirmay Chakravarty have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Your edit was disruptive as the page was accepted through AFC submission with this diff https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jyotirmay_Chakravarty&oldid=1084434112. Please refrain from such act. _{- Signed by}NeverTry4Me ^Talk 04:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NeverTry4Me: You are lucky that I'm a nice guy or you'd be taking a trip to WP:ANI for accusing me of vandalism and disruption for putting a notability tag on an article during new page patrol. It matters on two levels here at the AFC is not infallible. First it certainly does not justify making such accusations for somebody placing the tag. Second, it does not justify removing the tag with no changes or discussions. I placed the notability tag because I felt it was an edge case, and alternative to AFD. The article has zero of the type of references required for GNG, and the article/topic does not meet any SNG provision. I'm going to simply sit back and leave it for another NPP'er to review. North8000 (talk) 12:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: Thanks for your understanding. But AFC accepted articles are already reviewed by a reviewer. Moreover, a Director General level police officer, with awards, scam investigation, etc., is notable by WP:COMMONSENSE. There are enough citations available as resource to support the article, though I have avoided landing CITEKILL. Kindly correct me if I'm wrong. _{- Signed by}NeverTry4Me ^Talk 12:19, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NeverTry4Me: I'll start by reiterating that I consider it an edge case and I'm not going to get that worried about an edge case. AT NPP we implement notability guidelines. They essentially say that in order for it to exist as a separate article it either has to meet a SNG criteria or else meet GNG which requires in depth coverage of the topic by independent sources. None of the sources is of that type. So it's not a matter of quantity of sources, it's a matter of having 1 or 2 of the required type of sources. The reference to director general was a brief unclear one in the lead and is not stated in the body, which the lead should merely be a summary of. For various reasons I'd recommend putting that clearly and explicitly in the body and sourcing / citing it. All things considered, I marked/passed it as reviewed and wish you happy editing in the future. North8000 (talk) 12:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000: I have cited government circular/notification for his Director General empanelment, and cited all Indian National level newspaper sources. The Indian newspapers have a common problem of using "Staff Reporter", "Correspondent", "Bureu" etc instead of using the reporter's name. In many instances, his name is misspelled also. I have used the correct name from the Indian Police Academy's official website. But, I am taking your advice/remark to update the article per Wiki policy. Thank you for your kind assistance. _{- Signed by}NeverTry4Me ^Talk 13:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My last suggestion was in essence to put in a sentence or two which clearly explains what that position is including what geographic area it was over. It sounds like maybe he was the highest level police official for a particular state or possibly all of India. North8000 (talk) 16:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@North8000 He was promoted to Director General level but he went for voluntary retirement with dissatisfaction over promotions are handled by politicians. His last posting was India level police officer. And he worked for India level agencies like the National Security Guard, Special Protection Group, SSB, Special Branch. Also, he handled many top investigation during his tenure. As per record available, he served 34 years in the police service before his voluntary retirement and he had 2 more years of his service which is a long service period. Also, as per resources available, he is 2nd youngest IPS officer from the state (youngest is Jayanta Narayan Choudhury). About his personal life, I don't know and I have no resource for it. _{- Signed by}NeverTry4Me ^Talk 00:06, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The best way I can think of saying it is for you to read your article as someone who knows nothing about the topic and no specialized knowledge about positions/items in India, and without looking at external links, and make sure that the most important items (such as the highest position that he held) are clearly stated and explained in text.North8000 (talk) 15:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Xerosydryle

See polywater. This is not so much a hoax as a case where the experimenter has deluded or deceived himself, which is pathological science. This is water behaving in a non-liquid fashion under ordinary conditions, supposedly due to an unusual supramolecular structure, which would be the hydrogen bonding becoming supercharged. Just like with the polywater of fifty years ago, if this were stable or metastable, it would have already happened. Thank you for flagging it. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:43, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: When I did the initial review I figured it was a neologism and probably promotional by/for whoever created it. Also it looked a bit like what's in the next paragraph (non-hoax gibberish which I guess is a type of hoax) . Also (I'm strong in a lot of science/tech areas but chemistry isn't one of them) I couldn't tell if (the neologism aside) if there was a real topic/article there which is why I took it to / made an inquiry at the chemistry project.

The wording of the bulk of the article reminded me of an interesting situation when I once exposed a large amount (at least dozens, I think even more than that) of hoax-via-non-hoax gibberish articles that had gotten through, created by a wiki-saavy person. In each they picked some what appeared to be vague technical area. They went and found random material from several sources and cut/pasted it in (probably with minor tweaks to avoid copyvio checks) and then cited the sources. The result was a very-wikipeian-looking sourced article which on the whole was incoherent gibberish which to an average reader just looked like "over my head". I was a newbie then and just reported it. I forgot what they/we were able to find out about the editor, but it sort of looked like a study or "expose" in progress which I caught and ended. Sort of like "look, just by knowing how to look Wikipedian, I was able to get 50 hoax/gibberish articles into Wikipedia" North8000 (talk) 12:56, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What slightly surprised me is that, although they realized that xerosydryle is not real science, they didn't recognize that it seems to be polywater. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: A part of how I got to be weak on chemistry is in high school when I ended up in an AP Chemistry class when they cancelled my wanted AP Physics class. They gave us way too much freedom and our group goofed off by saying that we were trying to make polywater. North8000 (talk) 15:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Charles-Valentin Alkan on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

done. North8000 (talk) 12:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on departments/authorities within cities

HI North8000.Hope you are keeping well. Thanks for reviewing your articles and sharing the feedback. However these all are Government organisations and subsequently will be edited with more related information on their functions and other details. Still if you have any feedback I am open to take it. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 02:43, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: Thanks for the post. To keep the discussion from being split, here's a copy of my post on your talk page:

(Title:Articles on departments/authorities within cities) First, most importantly, thanks for your work! Next, during new page patrol work I came upon a larger amount of articles on departments/authorities within cities. These articles seem to consist of mostly general info regarding the type of department/authority (copied between many many articles) and then a smaller amount of content that is unique to the subject. Also much of the latter is about individual related events rather than being directly about the subject as a whole. If you are still making more of these, I'd like you to consider make them instead a paragraph or section within the article of the city which they are a part of. Thanks again for your work.

To get more specific, it appears that you have over 100 of these awaiting review. From a sampling, it appears that each contains mostly "boiler plate" which is copied across a large number of articles. ......material and references that are about this type of entity in general rather than the specific topic of the article. And it looks like 95%-100% of the sources are about this type of entity in general rather than the specific topic of the article. IMO this is basically mass creation of articles which clearly fail WP:notability.....no sourcing to meet GNG and clearly not meeting the SNG for organizations. It should be noted the GNG requires some in-depth coverage about the subject of the article. And so info about that type of entity in general or about related happenings within it does not count towards that requirement. I think that mass creation in this manner might also conflict with guidelines/policies/ procedures. My post was to pursue the idea of you just putting the info that is unique to the topic as a sentence or section in the article for the city which it is a part of.....as a minimum for any new ones so that the IMO problem doesn't get any larger. What do you think?North8000 (talk) 13:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HI North8000. Thanking you for your detailed reply. I will surely consider all your suggestions making other articles with some time gap. However just wanted to share with you that these are government organisations with public interest. I came across many Government Organisations which are in main space without notable references but in public interest. These organisations are situated in country side with limited or no media coverage but supporting the local population. More importantly the addresses of these organisations and the heads governing them are important along with their contacts to approach them. However if you feel I need to give some more time before adding more articles, I will follow. Thanks again. Gardenkur (talk) 13:36, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts on this topic are that these articles should be merged into a main article, and not left as standalone articles because they fail GNG and WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. Organizations/departments/authorities, etc. within a country/state/city should be merged into the main article about the country/state/city. If already included there, then redirect the standalones to the #section title. Some examples: Faisalabad, Pakistan, New York City, Delhi, United States government and on and on. Atsme 💬 📧 15:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the mass creation of articles with boiler plate text and that fail GNG and SNG should be merged into the main articles about the city/country/state. If small factoids are the only variation between a number of articles then these factoids can merged into a main article. The rationale that these mass produced articles are for the public interest is not part of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies.

Also, other Government Organizations without notable references, which Gardenkur noticed, is not relevant to this discussion. We are talking about the articles that Gardenkur is mass producing that fail WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE as well as GNG and SNGs. Additionally, references that do not specifically cover the topic of the article do not indicate notability for the topic. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 21:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't agree with @Atsme that it's appropriate for NPP to push for the merging of the huge number of existing articles on local authorities, including in the Indian context the hundreds if not thousands of articles on taluks, mandals and panchayats. Steve Quinn has a point that for want of sources a new article on a local authority could be better merged, as can be decided case by case by individual NPP reviewers, but in light of the strong existing precedent for local authority articles anything more prescriptive than that may be too wide a subject to be decided on someone's talk page. Be aware please also that WikiProject India have already discussed Gardenkur's contributions - may need to take that into account. Ingratis (talk) 06:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that big decisions can't be made at my talk page. Reasons why it's here at the moment: 1. This is where I was conversing with the editor. 2. I was looking to get some extra guidance and asked for it at NPP. 3. This pssibly might convince/guide @Gardenkur: to self-implement a new direction. On the other hand one could argue that we aren't making any big decision, we're just implementing what has already been decided and written into the notability guidelines. Gardenkur, I that that any outcome (whether it's right here and now or through AFD's etc.) will be to say to put the small amount of unique material into the corresponding city article and to not have seperate articles for these types of entities. What do you think of that idea?

The alternative is that I might take a "test case" pair of these articles to AFD, request input elsewhere, and aske that it be kept open for 2-3 weeks to have a thorough discussion. North8000 (talk) 10:47, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HI North8000. Nice to see you back again. I really thank your help and efforts in streamlining these articles. As I always said the reason to get these articles on Wikipedia is they are government organisations and public needs them for their help and concerns. I understand Wikipedia has notability clause which might not be met by some of them. However this will be a nice platform to source information in the days to come. If we mix organisations with cities the purpose will not be solved unable to incorporate their administrative information. Will wait for your inputs. Gardenkur (talk) 11:01, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll probably do my described "test case" idea. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:08, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

North8000 please ping me or notify me on my talk page about the AfD when it happens. Thanks. Also, in the near future, it might be necessary to go to ANI regarding this issue because it seems Gardenkur is demonstrating WP:IDHT and seems uncooperative. Once again, public interest is not included in our guidelines and policies. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 13:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HI Steve Quinn, North8000. First I offer my sincere apologies to both. I stopped creating articles on this. Request you to kindly give a chance and if it repeats you can take necessary action. I didnt do anything deliberately. Hope you both will excuse. Thanks again and looking forward to work with you both. Gardenkur (talk) 13:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Local election pages

I saw your comment at WP:Articles for deletion/1996 Chorley Borough Council election in response to doktorb's keep comment. I have no doubt about the verifiable nature of local election coverage, and I am actually sympathetic to the argument made - that Wikipedia can be a repository for all of the (verifiable) information (about local politics). The standard for events, as you mentioned is WP:Notability (events), but local politics (especially local elections) does not neatly fit within the overall guidelines - GNG can easily be met (especially in jurisdictions with a local paper), elections have consequences (lasting effects)... I do agree that there are some elements of elections that cut the other way too (especially the national or international impact of a local election). But, the question in my mind is how much of a transformation exists if Wikipedia does become the go-to source for information about elections (again since the information is verifiable)? Does it help the global audience if Wikipedia is a repository for election results (even with a minimum of context)? Is Wikipedia harmed by being a repository of this type of "stats-only" election coverage (I see election results as fundamentally different from sporting statistics or economic data)? I don't know. Thank you for starting the discussion. --Enos733 (talk) 14:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post. First I'll start by listing my main thoughts and motivations in these areas:

With my NPP hat on, I'd like to get some guidance on these. Having a thorough discussion that we can link to or possibly list at wp:common outcomes would be at least some help on this
I consider a "Stats only" article to be a type of list article. There's very little wp:notability/wp:not guidance given regarding list articles and I'd like to see more guidance there developed.

I personally don't go by the "what would be the harm done?" criteria. We already have "Wikipedia except with no selectivity"; it's called the internet. :-) A big part of Wikipiedia's value (and desirability for people wanting to get "their thing" into it) is it's selectivity. So somebody with something that is non-notable wants to get into that spot which is prime only because because non-notable stuff is exluded. Sort of like the smoker who wants to smoke in a nice fresh- smelling area......the non-smoking section. :-)

Now, on to my opinion your core question. If we were talking about maybe 50,000 of the most notable of individual elections having such an article, I think it would be a plus. A criteria which would encompass 5,000,000 or 100,000,000 potential election articles, not.

Thanks again for writing. North8000 (talk) 15:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMO creation of too many non-wp:notable articles

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping fine. Thanks for your detailed suggestion. I had started reading the guidelines and will continue even if I get experience later, so that I dont miss them. However, believe me when I start any article, first I find in Wikipedia whether the article exists and secondly to find reliable secondary sources for all of them to get notability. A lot of hard work goes in writing each article to understand the context and rephrase them as per Wikipedia standards. I feel disappointed if some of them are deleted or redirected. But I observed the percentage of mine is less compared to few of them. Currently I stopped writing articles on Government organisations I leave it to you to decide if you want me to continue. Half of my articles which were deleted went through discussion and they were not deleted because they didnt meet notability criteria. Secondly those which were redirected were due to delay from my side to add more content at a later stage. I dont want to annoy you as I am looking forward to work with you in this platform and want to move forward under your guidance. If at any time you have any guidance for me please feel free to share and I would be obliged. Thanking you. Yours sincerely. Gardenkur (talk) 12:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post. The main guidance that I can offer is what I put on your talk page. But for emphasis, for the 1-2 sources required for wp:notability, "reliable secondary" isn't enough. They also need to be independent of the topic and have in-depth coverage of the topic of the article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:38, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping fine. I see that you have placed my articles in Articles for Deletion discussion page. I respect your decision. However, if this procedure is followed that all articles irrespective of whether they meet Wikipedia standards will be nominated for deletion. During my editing experience I saw many government bodies dont meet Wikipedia standards. Also they are not structured properly. I did it to get uniformity and efficiency in these articles. Can I request you to move them to draft stage so that I can polish them. I respect your decision in all ways. Thank you. Gardenkur (talk) 23:34, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Air Force Common Admission Test,Central Airmen Selection Board,Appellate Tribunal for Electricity,Ayurveda Retreat,Central Airmen Selection Board, Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited,Securities Appellate Tribunal,Central Government Industrial Tribunal.

Hi North8000. Thanks for your time and efforts in reviewing these pages. Looking forward to work with you. Gardenkur (talk) 02:47, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Hello, North8000,

I was at Gardenkur's talk page and noticed that you were responsible for reviewing all of their new article creations, some of which have had problems. I just deleted an article they created about a fellow whose only notability is that he waits in line for other people for a living. On the talk page, there were dozens of notices from you.

Is this just "luck of the draw" or do you specifically try to review their work? It seemed like a strange coincidence to have the same reviewer evaluating all of their articles and pronouncing them "Good work". At this point, I'm just curious about this as I don't know the procedures that New Page Reviewers work by. Thanks for any explanation you can provide. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:58, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Thanks for your vigilance. First background and then specific. For a multitude of reasons, NPP pretty much has to confine itself to "should/can this be a separate article?" questions without even getting into the broader "does it have problems"? question (which most new articles do) Overall, most NPP decisions revolve around wp:notability which is a big fuzzy ecosystem with the main guidelines being core but not the totality. When I review try to go by the "standard/norm". Lately NPP has been drowning/breaking down in a backlog, and even trying to keep even requires the more active page reviewers to each average completing reviews on about 50 articles per day in their available wikiminutes that they can devote to NPP. Recently someone at NPP patrol started a new report that lists unreviewed articles by editor and I started to look at the biggest groups and I decided that it would be efficient to deal with the blocks of near-identical articles that are in the biggest groups. After doing some easy ones I ran across Gardenkur's with about 120 new unreviewed articles. Long story short, I saw maybe 10 that could pass by the norms and 110 that probably need to get deleted. I opened up a sort of notice and dialog with Gardenkur and also asked at NPP for more thoughts from other NPP'ers (see above, starting with "Articles on departments/authorities within cities" a few posts back on this talk page for that dialog, since Gardenkur always responds on my talk page, I moved/kept it here to avoid splitting) and they agreed to stop making the "110" type of articles. So I recently went through the 120 and found 10 which I think could pass by the norms and reviewed them. Between liking to post complimentary messages for creators and and as possible solace for what's next, I posted such messages on their talk page. Those "10" are probably what you formed your current impression from. My next step (which I'm still doing more analysis on, particularly geography/cities/governmental boundaries in India) is that I probably need to get about 110 of Gardenkur's articles deleted. North8000 (talk)

Hello, North8000,

I was going to ask you about all of these articles that you moved to Draft space and came upon this message to you which I had posted yesterday. I think Draftifying all of those 90+ pages (which I'm sure took a big chunk of your time) was a good move. Usually editors who create articles this quickly get themselves into trouble with experienced editors who don't have much patience for this kind of conduct so I'm glad you have started a discussion with them about their work. There is no hurry to creating articles so if they could focus on quality, not quantity, it would benefit them as an editor and the project as a whole.

I also posted a notice on their talk page as they were doing some knee-jerk reverting of IP edits which can be a concern with new editors. I think they don't want the possible antagonism of reverting a registered editor (who might complain) and IPs are seen as likely vandals even though most are just regular editors like you and me. Thank you for extending your hand and guiding them through this phase of their editing career. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I think it's about time I passed some gratitude your way. I keep seeing your name popping up in AfD and AfC places, and I note the kindness and care in how you approach things and I thank you for that. CT55555 (talk) 17:38, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CT55555: Thanks! I try North8000 (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Town Kolkata Development Authority (NKDA) and others moved to draft space

Hi North8000. Thanks for your time and efforts and honouring my request. Will follow as you guide or let me know how to proceed. Nice to work with you. Gardenkur (talk) 11:33, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to do that. North8000 (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. With your hard work done moving my articles to draft space for which Iam really obliged and if you guide me I will start working in these articles to make them productive under your guidance. Also as suggested by Mccapra were followed by me but somewhere the gap was felt by them and I will follow and correct it now onwards. Thanks and looking forward to work with you. Gardenkur (talk) 06:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: May I create a separate page in your user space for that purpose so that it will not get lost in your very active talk page? North8000 (talk) 14:41, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. You are my mentor so whatever you say I will obey. You dont need to ask me. Just command me and I will follow. Don't know if my appreciations would be accepted in Wikipedia or I would have given lots of Barnstars for you. Thanks again. Gardenkur (talk) 14:48, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draftifications

I dropped by to thank you for working with Gardenkur to try and get them to change their approach to article creation. I had a go last year, moved a bunch of their articles to draft and then moved them back to mainspace after they’d done more work in them. I thought they’d got the point but looking at their recent creations, clearly not. Maybe you’ll make better progress. They could be a really productive editor if they can get away from this gamified approach. Good luck! Mccapra (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccapra: Thanks. This time they are a part of the agreement to move to draft space which included them discussing with me the first few that they bring back. They seem to welcome the guidance. We'll see how it goes. North8000 (talk) 13:17, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but have they actually worked on improving those draftified articles at all? Currently seems to be starting a new "series" of articles on academic qualifications Diploma (India), Bachelor of Architecture (India), Bachelor of Sowa Rigpa Medicine and Surgery (BSRMS) (India) -- contain way too much unencyclopedic detail. Don't see why the first two can't just be covered in Diploma / Bachelor of Architecture respectively, and the latter mentioned in Traditional Tibetan medicine.

—2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the post. My current involvement with Gardenkur is these two things:

They'll consult me before bringing any of that set of articles out of draft
I'm working on teaching them a few things that I've selected as being of particular importance.

I really can't speak for anything outside of that. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thanks, —2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 17:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chorley Borough Council election AfD

Hi, I didn't want to clutter up the AfD, but wanted to let you know how much I agree with the sentiment of your last comment. That the AfD, by being discussed properly, might help us to sort out what we want to do for future local elections. That was, in fact, why I replied to the AfD as a lengthy comment without expressing keep or delete. I would actually delete the Chorley Borough Council article because it's only statistics and the election doesn't seem to have been anything out of the ordinary. I don't think Wikipedia has a duty to mirror all the public statistics needed for democratic openness; we're an encyclopaedia, not a government database. If the election had been of nation-wide political significance, or stood out in some exceptional way, I'd happily have an article. The problem about local elections is obvious: they are rather boring things that happen very frequently and often without any exceptional consequence or long-term meaning, and yet they will always generate a decent amount of reliable press content at the time. So a case can always be made that they're notable, even if there's really nothing to write about. It does need clarification. Elemimele (talk) 17:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Elemimele: Thanks for the post. I definitely agree that "stats only" articles are not suitable for Wikipedia. I this case I think that it has to be taken in the context of combining wp:notability and wp:not. While humans are good at dealing with a combination of two different considerations and Wikipedia tacitly acknowledges that process in many way, it fails to explicitly acknowledge it leaving a typical AFD to try to based on just one. "Stats only" is an indicator of failure to provide GNG type sources. This is the overall standard although the afd process side "prove a negative dow not follow that. Because I wanted to help get this sorted out (rather than seek a particular outcome I picked this as an edge case regarding the size/scope of the entity covered by the election. Thanks again. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:13, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Election articles

The thread on NPP got archived, so leaving this here. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2004_Salt_Lake_County_Council_election was a keep with minimal participation while Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2002_Salt_Lake_County_Council_election was no consensus, also with little participation. It looks like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1996 Chorley Borough Council election is going be no consensus or delete. More confirmation that AFD is inconsistent and just depends on who shows up to a particular discussion. MB 04:11, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MB: Thanks for pointing the others out. My goal on the latter was/is to get one with much more extensive discussion and debate and a thorough close which might help guide us on these. And the fact that this one might be a "middle of the road" case might make it mores useful in that respect. Someday we should probably have an organized RFC but (for this type of case) it would be difficult to handle well unless we acknowledge that decisions are and should be made by combining multiple considerations together. In this case, degree of compliance with with wp:not / the degree of encyclopedicness and wp:notability. When it works well (in the current fuzzy system) it's usually called a wp:notability decision, but in fact influenced/calibrated by the other considerations. I think that you recognized the wp:not aspect in your nominations but the discussion showed that trying to treat this type as only stand-alone wp:not (which would only deal with clear-cut violations of stand-alone wp:not) doesn't work out. Perhaps we should have an rfc which acknowledges the interplay/combination of considerations. BTW your post triggered me to go write this at the Chorley one. North8000 (talk) 12:58, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society

Dear North8000/Archive 2,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.

Best regards, Jax 0677 (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines: "Large talk pages are difficult to read and load slowly over slow connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." – this talk page is 371.7 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you. Jax 0677 (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll trim it down. Not to 75 KB which sounds unnecessarily microscopic but I'll trim this down to substantially smaller than it is. North8000 (talk) 17:44, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting some draft improvement help

Greetings @ North8000,

I tend to help out and promote draft and article expansions. same time English not being native language I need to seek help in language related areas.

I had helped out an article Draft:Ex-Muslim activism in Kerala but linguistic part is beyond my capacity. Requesting your visit and help in improving the article if topic interests you.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 13:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bookku: I never have enough wiki-minutes but I'll try to help where I can. I took a look. The English there isn't bad, but has an overall problem is that it is written in a conversational tone way, like somebody noticing things and talking about them rather than written in an enclyclpedia / summary form type way. Also the lead needs to be a summary of what's in the article. The lead there is more of an introduction via noting a few items. I'll make a few tweaks there but this will need more work than I will be able to do. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:59, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May be I work as much to get out of copyright but impact of tone and style of the sources remains indirectly on my writing because writing is influenced by sources. I do not know how to get out of it. Any ways many thanks for your valuable inputs and possible help.

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of coups and coup attempts on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the list revert

Hi, thanks for pointing out the weakness in my first attempt to address notability as an optional requirement for stand alone lists. At the source venue I have boldly floated new text to address your excellent observation. Please check it out. If you want to revert that's fine, but please consider this post as a prior request for an explanation how you think the text I used flies in the face of current practice...... because my goal is to more clearly describe current practice. If we see it differently, that's fine, let's work together to figure out where ambiguity has crept in, and work together to purge it with clarity. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:10, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NewsAndEventsGuy: Thanks for the post. Your new version does not have that major change embedded it it and so that solves the main problem. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:38, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta love BRD! Thanks for the input. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 03:09, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cannabis in New Zealand on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Recession on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles in Draft section to be prepared for main space

Hi North8000. Hope you are well. Last few days i was not well for some time and rest of the days spent in reading guidelines you created in new user space. Now planning to clean my draft space under your guidance. Kindly guide me how to proceed. Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 03:41, 1 August 2022 (UTC) @Gardenkur:[reply]

How about you pick one of the articles and then we review and analyze it together? North8000 (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Thanks a lot for your reply. My gratitude for your support too. Sure will do accordingly. Will pick up articles of government organisations of major cities first. In the background will keep adding more direct references for government organisations of other cities. Hope that works. Sincere thanks again. Gardenkur (talk) 14:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Can you help review this article.Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 14:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC) Draft:New Town Kolkata Development Authority (NKDA)[reply]

Sorry to ask this, but I think it would help if we dealt with 2 Development Authority articles at the same time. Could you pick a 2nd Development Authority article? North8000 (talk) 17:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I shouldn’t have to tell you not to use edit summaries to attack other editors

But it seems I do. Doug Weller talk 18:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it by seconds. North8000: you know better. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I shouldn't have to tell you to not make false accusations of "attacking" North8000 (talk) 18:03, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022

Hello North8000,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination: MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF: The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers: The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

Reminders

Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NPP discussions

Hi, on the activity requirement, could you clarify if you support/oppose/or are neutral in saying a reviewer must be active at least once in a year at NPP? Looking to establish consensus.

Also, on the Backlog count, you said it was an important template on wanted it back on top (which I did). Do you have a comment on the update frequency. No one else has expressed a desire to have it restored to 15 minute updating. Thanks. MB 23:57, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MB: Certainly! I did both. North8000 (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Sea on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 14:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NPP message

Hi North8000,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Assault weapon

Is there any particular reason why you accepted this change? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 18:05, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AzureCitizen: I originally missed this because you put it on my user page....I just moved it here. The literal answer is because it met the pending changes criteria. To use an example to emphasize that point, I've often accepted an edit under pending changes criteria and then then immediately reverted it for other reasons. North8000 (talk) 11:03, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops, I thought I was posting on your Talk Page at the time, sorry! I left that note because I was surprised to see a change like that accepted; I figure it's easier to reject the change outright during the approval/disapproval process. No worries in any event. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 13:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AzureCitizen: Yes, the pending changes thing is often misunderstood. The criteria for that is basically just "not vandalism".North8000 (talk) 12:06, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Award for 2020

		The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award
		For over 360 article reviews during 2020. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a barnstar to show appreciation for the NPP reviews you did back in 2020. We realize this is late, but NPP fell behind in some coordination activities. We are just getting caught up. If you don't want to receive "old" barnstars, please just ignore this and reply (with a ping) to let us know not to send you any more. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824: Thanks!North8000 (talk) 11:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Flag of Afghanistan on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 21:46, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Sinn Féin on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 15:36, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2023 Nigerian general election on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 14:52, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Shōnen manga on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Title deletion

You post message in my talk and now I contact you. Title Giottiline Ginko is no sense car's name because it does not made: exact title is Giotti Victoria Ginko sourced by me. Wrong title deletion needed and I moved linked articles too: in this moment no article is linked at "Giottiline Ginko". Ciao Staiolone (talk) 05:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done by user:Reaper Eternal, ok--Staiolone (talk) 05:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

???? North8000 (talk) 16:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:2023 Nigerian general election § Requested move 13 September 2022

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2023 Nigerian general election § Requested move 13 September 2022. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:/e/ (operating system) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Edward Faulks, Baron Faulks on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thirteenth First Edit Day!

Hey, North8000. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It Was a Home

Hey North, hope all is well with you, and thanks for all you do on the project, especially NPP. I came across an oddity while reviewing today. On 3 articles, you left a message of encouragement for the article's creator (something I need to do more of). And in all 3, you made the comment, "I marked it as reviewed". However, none of the articles was marked reviewed, and I checked the log to make sure that another editor hadn't unreviewed them, but did not see it. The last one was this article. I'm not sure you know, but when you leave a message, you also have to mark it reviewed. I thought that if you left a message, it automatically marked it reviewed, but it doesn't. Regardless, just thought I'd let you know. Keep up your fine efforts. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:43, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: Thanks for the post. I do know that. Most likely I just screwed up and forgot to mark. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:55, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

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

(t · c) buidhe 21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Alec Baldwin on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 18:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crisis pregnancy center on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2022

News and notes: Board vote results, bot's big GET, crat chat gives new mop, WMF seeks "sound logo" and "organizer lab"

In focus: NPP: Still heaven or hell for new users – and for the reviewers

In the media: A few complaints and mild disagreements

Special report: Decentralized Fundraising, Centralized Distribution

Discussion report: Much ado about Fox News

Interview: ScottishFinnishRadish's Request for Adminship

Opinion: Are we ever going to reach consensus?

Serendipity: Removing watermarks, copyright signs and cigarettes from photos

Recent research: How readers assess Wikipedia's trustworthiness, and how they could in the future

Traffic report: Kings and queens and VIPs

Featured content: Farm-fresh content

Gallery: A Festival Descends on the City: The Edinburgh Fringe, Pt. 2

CommonsComix: CommonsComix 2: Paulus Moreelse

From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 Years ago: September 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some bubble tea for you!

Your comment in favour of maintaining the article's accuracy on assault weapon is greatly appreciated.

Thank you very much. Riverbend21 (talk) 04:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Riverbend21: Thanks. Being informative and accurate is our mission. North8000 (talk) 09:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Administrator changes

ScottishFinnishRadish

Staxringold

Ahoerstemeier (deceased) • Ched

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678

CheckUser changes

GorillaWarfare

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, consensus was found that if the rationale for a block depends on information that is not available to all administrators, that information should be sent to the Arbitration Committee, a checkuser or an oversighter for action (as applicable, per ArbCom's recent updated guidance) instead of the administrator making the block.
Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
Community comment on the revised Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines is requested until 8 October.

Technical news

The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
A modification to the deletion RfC remedy in the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been made to reaffirm the independence of the RfC and allow the moderators to split the RfC in two.
The second phase of the 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review closes 3 October.

Miscellaneous

An administrator's account was recently compromised. Administrators are encouraged to check that their passwords are secure, and reminded that ArbCom reserves the right to not restore adminship in cases of poor account security. You can also use two-factor authentication (2FA) to provide an extra level of security.
Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections open 2 October and close 8 October.
You are invited to comment on candidates in the 2022 CUOS appointments process.
An RfC is open to discuss whether to make Vector 2022 the default skin on desktop.
Tech tip: You can do a fuzzy search of all deleted page titles at Special:Undelete.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question, new page search

Hi North8000, you did the New Page Review of the article Robert Searight. Thank you for this message you left on my talk page. I have a question, why doesn't the page show in a google search? It doesn't come up when I search for "Wikipedia Robert Searight". Thanks in advance. Bammesk (talk) 03:26, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bammesk: Sorry I was gone for a while. I rechecked and the article has been marked as reviewed. This should allow indexing for search engines. Beyond that I really don't know, Perhaps you could ask at village pump technical. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Founding Fathers of the United States on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of dignitaries at the state funeral of Elizabeth II on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 20:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bharat Jodo Yatra on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Latest

Feel free to take a look at my latest on Assault Weapon if you have a moment. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 14:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC) {Ping|Moops}}I think that your changes were good. North8000 (talk) 18:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on lists that should be deleted or merged

North, I know we have not agreed in the past on the subject about lists where I have fought hard to keep material most of the time, but I have finally had a personal encounter with some stuff that I think you might normally complain about, and I'm not sure what to do for several reasons because I don't want to go through and nominate each one for fear of someone accusing me of being a mass deletionist for one thing, and for a couple of other reasons, I'm actually pretty sure they count as notable, but I just know they don't belong here as articles, so I don't know what reason to use for deletion that will convince the community to agree with me. Another issue I have is that when I looked at the [What links here] it looks like many articles depend on linking to some of these lists so I'm not even sure if they should be deleted just because I don't have a good feeling about them. Also pinging my past mentors @Betty Logan and @SMcCandlish to assist. Thank you all for helping me on my Wikipedia journey. Any advice would be appreciated. The lists in question are:

I noticed that one of these lists seemed like maybe it was merged into another article, so maybe that is a possible alternative solution to deletion about the fact that so many articles depend on linking to these lists:

List of actors who have played Elvis Presley

Huggums537 (talk) 15:13, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not something I know much about, but I agree these don't seem to be encyclopedic topics, but rather articles of borderline-WP:INDISCRIMINATE trivia. Per WP:PERFCAT, we don't even create categories for actor-by-role or actor-by-subgenre, so I can't imagine we'd keep articles of them. The last on the list above might be mergeable into Spaghetti western. Maybe some of the others can merge to specific character articles. Dunno what to do with the president one. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 16:16, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I'm aware of the process for nominating deletions, but is there also a process where I can nominate these merges as well? Huggums537 (talk) 16:25, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I haven't been to AfD in a long while. I just took a look and remembered that I can nominate merges there. Huggums537 (talk) 17:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Either way, just to clarify, my main interest an involvement is that I think that more guidance / criteria for lists should be developed and that it should become a bit more organized vs. totally scattered as it is now. Especially given the infinite number of compound list articles that should be created. I think that the only time we've disagree is via your reversion of my addition of: "There should be a reasonable expectation that readers will seek to see that particular grouping and selection of list items." — Preceding unsigned comment added by North8000 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 01 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "compound list articles"? Like lists that need to be merged with other lists or something? Huggums537 (talk) 22:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I forgot about that disagreement, and it feels rather embarrassing to have gone back and read it again with my current feelings about these lists being rather subjective, which is exactly what I said my concerns were in that discussion. It's hard not being hypocrite on Wikipedia when your own comments come back to haunt you. 😆 Huggums537 (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I should have been clearer and said compound criteria list articles. Those with two more more criteria. For example, list of blue-eyed movie actors that performed in 1920's horror films. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 01:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, well given that I have now run into those lists I just mentioned above, I'm starting to see your point a little bit better these days... 😁 Huggums537 (talk) 02:57, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merges are normally just proposed and listed at WP:PAM, not taken to AfD. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 07:14, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I had no idea about that. Thanks very much! Huggums537 (talk) 14:13, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you now think about addition of ""There should be a reasonable expectation that readers will seek to see that particular grouping and selection of list items."? North8000 (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with it, but am not sure where you propose adding it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Smc, he already added this, but then I reverted it and had a little disagreement with him on the talk page and it got put back in, and so I think he was directing that question at me, but since he has asked, I think it is a reasonable addition and it makes a lot more sense to me now than it did back then. Huggums537 (talk) 05:11, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go look for it. I think that it was on a MOS page. Sounds like not the "main" place but there is no main place for lists. North8000 (talk) 11:40, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I skimmed through it the other day. Here it is: Wikipedia_talk:Stand-alone_lists/Archive_11#Appropriate_topics_for_lists Huggums537 (talk) 12:21, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of weird looking back at some of my past arguments now... Huggums537 (talk) 12:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And it wasn't even all that long ago! Huggums537 (talk) 12:31, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

How come you don't have this right? You should. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:02, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: Thanks for the post. The criteria seem sort of backwards. I would think that being experienced and signs that someone only makes new articles after careful deliberation would be a good criteria. But theirs includes that someone has created a large amount of new articles. So I asked and they said no. Maybe someday I'll think about being an admin. North8000 (talk) 16:17, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback Request: Folk band in Australia

Hi there, I'm an editing noob and am hoping to get some feedback on an article I drafted about an upcoming folk music band in Australia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Austral_(band) . Maybe you would be interested in commenting on it? 27.32.156.182 (talk) 00:25, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@27.32.156.182: Long story short, you need to add 1-2 (preferably 2) sources that discuss the band in some depth. The sources don't \need to be prominent, but they do need to be published. Which means some degree of editorial control from the publication/site. If you have any more questions, I'd be happy to try and help/. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kryvyi Rih on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 16:48, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:New Town Kolkata Development Authority (NKDA)

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping well. Can you please review this article, as I added two additional references and let me know if its good to move to main space. If you have any suggestions for similar articles kindly let me know. Also I will add relevant references for similar articles for other cities and take your approval before moving them to main space. Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 13:16, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per our discussion above, I wanted to address 2 "development authority" articles at the same time. Could we do it that way......i.e. give me a link to a second one when you are ready? North8000 (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2022 (UTC) Added bolding 8/19/22. North8000 (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Sorry for the confusion earlier. You can review this development authority. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 03:43, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Sorry for the reminder again as I added few more references to one more development authority. You can review this development authority. Thanks. Gardenkur

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping as its been long time having seen any message from you. You can review this development authority. Thanks. Gardenkur

Hi North8000. Sure will do. Sorry saw the message late. Will do accordingly. Gardenkur (talk) 10:03, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. You can review this article too.Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 07:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. You can review this article. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 11:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: I mentioned another development authority article because I also wanted to deal with the commonalities. Do you have another development authority" one? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC) North8000 (talk) 02:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Sorry to remind you. Can you please review above two development authority articles to move them to main space. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 00:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping fine as it has been some time since I saw your communication last. Sorry to remind you. If you kindly advise me on above articles which are in draft stage, I can slowly start moving them to main stage to clean my draft section. Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 02:20, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't realize that you had provided two development authority articles as I requested. Will do. North8000 (talk) 13:50, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recapping, @Gardenkur: the two development authority articles are: Draft:New Town Kolkata Development Authority (NKDA) and Draft:Nazira Development Authority. I'm starting the work now. North8000 (talk) 21:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping well. It has been more than a month since I have submitted few articles for your review. Could you please complete it asap and let me know your feedback. Need to clean my draft space too or I will have many articles at a time to handle not to loose them out of draft. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 02:59, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: I did a substantial amount of work looking at those two articles and then became so busy/buried in real life that I've not had any substantial time for Wikipedia, nor will I until approx October 24th. IMO I know what should happen on those, but it will take me about 1 hour that I don't have to politely and respectfully explain and support what I have to say, including with our differences in native languages. I could give you the short version now if you wish and describe it in more detail later if our wish. Those two articles are about 95% an exact copy of each other (and I think that this is probably the case with all of your development authority articles). And the "95%" which is copied between them is about development authorities in India in general, not about the the particular development authority which is the topic of the article. And for those two, the other 5% is basically trivial information about the specific development authority which probably shouldn't even be in Wikipedia. In my opinion what you should do is create a nice article about Development Authorities in India in general. And if you have some non-trivial information about the development authority in a particular city, you could put information into the article about that city. And then I'd suggest getting your other development authority articles in draft space deleted. You should not feel bad about not having a large quantity of articles created. I've had about 68,000 Wikipedia edits since 2009, about half of them in article space including taking one of them through Good Article, Featured Article and worldwide "article of the day". And I've only created about 20 new articles, with only about half of those being technically new articles. You are just getting started and have hundreds of new articles and I think are running into the inevitable issues from that and it would be good for you to make the adjustment in your approach. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:04, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Thanks for your detailed reply with guidance and sorry for disturbing you in middle of your issues. In such case can we redirect respective development authorities not confirming to notability to those cities. In this case if anyone wants information or is creating new articles on that name later, can see it as available in this platform. I have created these initially to update unique information for each authority as History, Chairman,location of office,email and website to reach them as informational tool to public. Iam sure in future someone will keep creating them. Thanks again. Gardenkur (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: I'd support and help in that plan. Just clarifying, right now we're only talking about the development authority articles. Again, I'll be mostly off wiki until October 24th. But we could start by you picking one of those articles and we could work through the details. Also, I'd probably ask for a 2nd opinion on the plan at NPP. And later do them all. North8000 (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Thanks for your support and opinion. We will proceed as you guide and do accordingly. Presently will post here all development authority of small towns and villages which doesnot have notability. Thanks again. Gardenkur (talk) 03:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022 work

Hi North8000. Below are the few devekopment authorities of middle scale towns which you can review and redirect to respective towns or cities.

1. Nazira Development Authority Done (in late October) North8000 (talk) 18:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2. Jorhat Development authority Done North8000 (talk) 18:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3. Sivasagar Development Authority Done North8000 (talk) 18:37, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

4. Tinsukia Development Authority Done North8000 (talk) 18:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

5. Puttaparthy Urban Development Authority Done North8000 (talk) 18:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The municipal corporations are larger administrative bodies than development authorities. Would prefer them for main space but will wait for your opinion.thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 12:30, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping well and back for review. When free request you to start the review process and guide me accordingly.Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 12:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: Thanks for the post. I'm back now and trying to catch up. I'll get started on those. Will take the first one as a test/example. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: I did one (New Town) to see how it goes. North8000 (talk) 17:54, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: I also did Nazira North8000 (talk) 19:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Thanks for giving a start on these articles. Will move as per your guidance. Gardenkur (talk) 22:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur:I'd also be happy to move them if you make a list. The one advantage is that I can immediately mark them as reviewed.North8000 (talk) 16:10, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping well. Sorry for the delay in communication as I was busy in other activities. The below are the list of new articles for review from your side to move them to main space.

1.Imphal Municipal Corporation.

2.Shivamogga City Corporation.

3.Mathura Vrindavan Municipal Corporation.

4.Badangpet Municipal Corporation.

5.Moradabad Municipal Corporation.

7.Bettiah Municipal Corporation.

11.Tumakuru City Corporation.

12.Meerpet Municipal Corporation.

13.Gorakhpur Municipal Corporation.

14.Saharanpur Municipal Corporation.

15.Bareilly Municipal Corporation.

To clean my draft space I submit above articles for your review. You can review and decide as you feel appropriate.Thanks.Gardenkur (talk) 08:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: So I think that the "development authority" should pretty clearly not be separate articles and I'll convert those to redirects. I will try to figure out / discuss with you what to do on the municipal corporation articles. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:52, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Thanks for your reply and also submit below articles as part of clean up process for your review.

16.Kota (South) Municipal Corporation.

17.Kota (North) Municipal Corporation.

18.Jodhpur (South) Municipal Corporation.

19.Jodhpur (North) Municipal Corporation.

20.Ajmer Municipal Corporation.

21.Kapurthala Municipal Corporation.

22.Phagwara Municipal Corporation.

23.Abohar Municipal Corporation.

24.Pathankot Municipal Corporation.

25.Hoshiarpur Municipal Corporation.

Thanks in advance.

@Gardenkur: You deleted your last post including your new additions to the list. Did you intend to do that? Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Iam really sorry if it has been accidentally deleted and if you can restore it. It was not intentional.Thanks.Gardenkur (talk) 01:27, 20 November 2022 (UTC) Do I need to give missing articles name again here.Gardenkur (talk) 06:22, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000.Hope you are keeping fine.Following additional articles for your review.

26. Jalandhar Municipal CorporationShahjahanpur Municipal Corporation

27.Sambalpur Municipal Corporation

28.Aizawl Municipal Corporation

29.Morena Municipal Corporation

30.Murwara Municipal Corporation

31.Rewa Municipal Corporation to be redirected to Rewa Municipal Corporation

32.Ratlam Municipal Corporation

33.Dewas Municipal Corporation

34.Sagar Municipal Corporation

35.Vijayapura Mahanagara Palike

36.Ballari Mahanagara Palike

37.Bihar Sharif Municipal Corporation

38.Hazaribagh Municipal Corporation

39.Adityapur Municipal Corporation

40.Deoghar Municipal Corporation

41.Chas Municipal Corporation

42.Jamshedpur Municipal Corporation

43.Yamunanagar Municipal Corporation

44.Panchkula Municipal Corporation

45.Corporation of the City of Panaji

46.Risali Municipal Corporation

47.Bhilai Charoda Municipal Corporation

48.Chirmiri Municipal Corporation

49.Birgaon Municipal Corporation

50.Dhamtari Municipal Corporation

51.Ambikapur Municipal Corporation

Thanks in advance. Gardenkur (talk) 13:27, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: Hello Gardenkur! For development authority articles it was easy to decide because I was 100% certain that they should not exist as separate articles. They did not contain suitable sources to establish wp:notability of the topic and IMO it unlikely that such sources don't exist. So a core guideline dictates that result. Also, there was essentially no good material in there that was unique to the development authority of the particular city. Typically there was just a sentence or two about a minor event. So there was no issue with simply converting to a redirect without trying to transfer any material to the city article.

Things are very slightly different for the Municipal corporation articles. The articles don't have sources to establish wp:notability, but, since the municipal corporation is basically another name for the government of the city, one could argue that such sources exist. So it's not a clear absolute that wp:notability prohibits existence as a separate article. I took a look at a few of the articles. They have the same issue that about 98% of the material is "boilerplate" about India Municipal corporations in general and 2% is some facts (like the names of the people currently holding offices) which could potentially be good material for the city article. So each of these is basically a "sub article" to the city article but with only a very tiny bit of content. Although the core guideline doesn't clearly dictate it, in my opinion these shouldn't exist as separate articles and I would not be comfortable with moving them into mainspace as articles. I see these as the possibilities:

I think that the best scenario would be to take the small amount of unique material (and sources for it) and moving it to the the corresponding city article. You would need to be the one to do the "move material" work because I don't have enough wiki-minutes to take on that work. Do you want to do that "move" work?
If not, my #2 choice would be for me to simple convert the articles into redirects as I did with the development authority articles.
The other possibility is for you to just do whatever you wish to do next with these without my involvement.

What do you think?

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Thanks for your detailed response. I understand that the articles on Municipal Corporation are bit confusing on meeting wp:notability, but being the governing agencies of town these are important corporations.You can atleast move some of them where I added relevant references and they meet the Wikipedia policies. In case of others I will add more references. However they are created on guidance from constitution of India by notification in official gazette to improve the cities. Also the administrative offices of these institutions are important informational requirements.Gardenkur (talk) 13:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that you understood my post. Here is what the main points were:

"Policy" dictated that the development authority articles shouldn't exist, and so I just implemented "policy" and turned them into redirects.
"Policy" does not dictate what should happen with the municipal corporation articles. So I am just giving my opinion. My opinion is that the facts that are unique to (only for) that particular corporation should be moved to the corresponding city article and then the municipal corporation articles converted into a redirect to the city article. This would be possibility #1. So I listed this and three other possibilities and asked your opinion. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 18:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. Hope you are keeping well. Starting from 1 iam adding additional references to make it more Wikipedia notable. Kindly have a look during your free time and guide me accordingly.Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gardenkur: I still don't think that you understand my post. I will say it shorter and more directly but my apologies if that makes it sound rude. The municipal corporation articles probably to no violate wp:notability. But for the reasons give, it is my mere opinion that they should be merged into the city articles, and so I don't want to personally move them as articles into article space. So I gave choice #1, #2 and #3 above. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000. I will move Municipal Corporations after adding more related reliable references. Also kindly guide me on Electricity Regulatory Commissions. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 12:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary break 2

Hi North8000. Thanks for your reply. I understood your suggestions. However, I feel that once moved to main space these articles will be subject to more additions on their geographical area,opportunities and challenges of each of these corporations and other relative information in the coming days. To make it more suitable to Wikipedia policies on articles for mainspace I am adding these references. There are already some of similar articles existing in Wikipedia platform and some point in future Iam sure someone will draft on these corporations. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 11:33, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'll move them as articles. I'm going to ask for advice at NPP. North8000 (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LAWYERING

Hi North8000, I'm writing to follow up about this section of the Wikilawyering essay:

Unlike Wikipedia, the legal world is 90% about technicalities, and a part of a lawyer's job to achieve a result using technicalities. So "wikilawyering" merely means taking a practice that is a good idea in the legal world and moving it into Wikipedia where it is a bad idea.

I think the essay would be stronger without this text, although I appreciate your attempt to edit this section after I added a 'dubious' tag in a cheeky moment when the original text once again kept me from considering whether to cite the essay in a discussion.

From my view, a lawyer primarily works with facts and laws, not "technicalities", to represent the interests of their client. What are sometimes complained about as classic "technicalities", e.g. there was a search when technically a warrant should have been obtained (therefore the evidence found is excluded), or a suspect in custody is questioned even though they technically should have first been informed of their right to remain silent and to have an attorney (requiring whatever they said to be inadmissible), or a defendant was technically entitled to a competent attorney (and therefore entitled to a new trial), can actually be fundamental rights, e.g. the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. There are cases that appear more technical, e.g. that depend on what the meaning of "is" is, but I don't think that is what the gist of the essay is describing as disruptive behavior.

I make a distinction by thinking of Wikipedia as the "client", which I think can be helpful for warding off inconsistent interpretations of P&Gs based on personal preference. Overall, I think the focus on "technicalities" in the essay may be misplaced, because the essay seems more focused on the misuse of P&Gs in ways that may implicate conduct policies. Perhaps the essay could be revised to clarify the meaning of 'technicality' in the context of Wikipedia, because the term seems to be used as a shorthand for using P&Gs to achieve objectives that are contrary to the spirit and fundamental principles of the encyclopedia. Beccaynr (talk) 13:45, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Beccaynr: Thanks for the post. You should take a peek at how it was before I started working on it and also read the talk page from then. . "Wikilawyering" in Wikipedia was defined categorically much more severely, and lawyers / that profession was treated much broadly negative. I softened both up. The term is deeply entrenched in Wikipedia, and inevitably refers to a negative. And BTW, while everything that you said about the profession is true, I think that undeniably so is "using technicalities". And the entrenched Wiki meaning clearly refers to the "using technicalities". Unless you would advocate deletion of the essay, I think that it is kind and positive that it can be in the context of the meaning in Wikipedia. On another note , IMO the most common use of Wikilawyering is to POV an article. This can be mild situations and IMO the term needs to be usable for mild situations. While one could argue that POV'ing article is "working against the aims of Wikpedia", the latter is a broader and more severe accusation and I think that the term needs to be usable for milder cases without that escalation. So I think that something "invoking policy or guideline for other than it's intended purpose" says that well, and also is a reminder of how P&G's are used and are supposed to be used in Wikipedia....for the intended purpose. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 02:45, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi North8000, I decided to write on your Talk page because I had reviewed some of the edit history and noticed you had added the content [13]. I think it should be removed because it seems distracting from the main points of the essay. It also does not seem kind nor positive, because it is a stereotype typically perpetuated in service of the denial of civil rights.

I also don't think a culture of broad negativity towards attorneys on Wikipedia is sufficient to support the specific content, even if the culture still exists, and maybe it should stop if it does. As a lawyer, I think the term 'wikilawyering' is great, but I don't think attorneys should be inaccurately portrayed to make the point about wikiconduct, and I think a more accurate portrayal of the legal profession can make the point more clearly.

So I'm not advocating for deletion of the essay, because I think it can be improved by removing the inaccurate POV I noted above, and I think it would help to have a little more precision in how the essay communicates its core concepts. But we can continue the discussion on the essay Talk page to seek more input from other editors - I just wanted to start by chatting with you because it is one of your contributions to the essay. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 03:48, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not married to any particular wording. I am to keeping a couple of core things:

Should include using P&G's for other than their intended purpose
Should include / acknowledge non-severe forms

And just noting, it needs to explain the wikipedia term.

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 04:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! and I will try to draft some proposed text over the next few days for a little more precision in the wording. Cheers, Beccaynr (talk) 04:11, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Environment and Climate Change Canada on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 15:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy belated Thanksgiving II!

	Happy belated Thanksgiving!
	Happy belated Thanksgiving to an old friend. Hope you snag some good black Friday deals for Christmas! P.S. you have some cool photos on your user page, and a duplicate photo of Notre Dame just FYI. Huggums537 (talk) 15:53, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:James Joyce on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cancer (astrology) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Beira's Place on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 17:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Alexei Yagudin on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. North8000 (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Altaic languages on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done North8000 (talk) 21:22, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need some assistance regarding a Wiki conference

Hey North, glad to speak to you again. I hope you're doing amazing. Recently, it was announced that Wikimedia would conduct its third conference in India, between 28-30 April 2023 in Hyderabad, Telangana. I felt like I should be taking part in it since I reside in the same country. Can you help me out with the process of registration and what will be my purpose of going there? Like can I just attend it as a spectator since it will be my first time? I'd be really helpful. Regards. Below is the link pertaining to the conference.

side note: I am blocked on Wiki commons, will it somehow affect the registration?

Wiki Conference India 2023.

And Merry Christmas to you and your family. :) Derivator2017 (talk) 10:37, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Derivator2017: Thanks for the compliment of assuming I know so many things. Unfortunately I don't know anything about the conference. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello North8000: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

		Happy Holidays
		Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton (talk) 18:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

North8000,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Quoting North8000 in here

[2] North8000, here

[3] BessieMaelstrom after Masem, here

[4] Masem, here

[5] Masem, here

[6] Blueboar, here

[7] North8000, here

[8] North8000, here

[9] North8000, here

[10] North8000, here

[11] North8000, here

[12] North8000, here

[13] GhostInTheMachine, here

[14] GhostInTheMachine, here

[15] GhostInTheMachine, here

[16] GhostInTheMachine, here

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]