User talk:Spasage/May2021

Disambiguation link notification for December 30

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. I have fixed it. --Spasage (talk) 17:08, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User rights

Hi Spasage, I've granted you the new page reviewer user right as you requested, I've also added pending changes reviewer user right to you account as it may be useful. You might also like to take a look at {{Pending changes reviewer granted}} and {{New Page Reviewer granted}} as they give some concise information on those user rights. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Callanecc: Thanks for granting me rights on new page and pending changes review. --Spasage (talk) 14:40, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Larisa Litvinova

Um, Larisa Litvinova has been deceased since 1997 and the only external links are in references. Why the problem tags? Can you explain? I will have to remove it bc it is inaccurate to say she is living. Was this a mistake?--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References of this article are not in English. So, it is very difficult to know if what is written is correct or not. --Spasage (talk) 16:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But 1.She is not alive, not no need for blp. Tagging a person deceased for 20 years as alive is vandalism 2. To get a general idea of what the sources say, you can use google translate. It's not perfect and in no way should be copied+pasted, but you can figure out 1997 and "cemetery" in the same sentence mean. 3. THERES NO RULE THAT SOURCES HAVE TO BE IN ENGLISH! See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources and Translations and transcriptions. Using Russian-language sources on a Soviet citizen is normal!--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. I provided 4 sources that said she is deceased, you can use an online translator, a Wikipedia translator volunteer, or a dictionary of your choice to confirm that. You tagged as blp without the slightest evidence to indicate that she is alive, a bogus claim. And there's no rule against having external links in references only, in fact its kind of encouraged.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you can verify what is written is correct, I have no issue. I can see that you have already removed tag.

If you think it's 100% false, just install a translator app on your browser, then click the links, have them translated, and you will get a general idea of what the website say and you will see it matches the wikipage (if to lazy to do that, copy+paste text into translator from each website). I can tell you I translated it to the best of my ability and it is correct, sites like airaces and warheros.ru are used as sources in many different language wikis. But if you are going to claim a WWII veteran born in 1918 and is reported to be dead be the entire internet and many books, I any going to need a really good source.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zapproved

Hi, thanks for your comment on this page. I have included some links to some reasonably notable websites and plan to add more; comparable companies in the industry are also listed, with similar or less content, and similar or fewer links, and don't have a similar banner attached (e.g., Conduent, Recommind) so I'm a little confused why this particular page is flagged. Any clarification is definitely welcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwalinsk (talk • contribs) 20:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All the pages which has similar issues will and should be tagged. This article looks like ad page. Wiki is mostly informational which helps people understand the topic. I am not sure, how notable this company is. It requires a lot of work and improvement. Once, it is improved, tags can be removed. --Spasage (talk) 21:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Hi! My article (California Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement) was reviewed by you, as I was notified. Thank you! Do you have any tips as to how I should improve sourcing? Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by JKen (talk • contribs) 19:12, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not have categories. Put couple of categories to this article. Secondly, add few reference. May be work done and organizational structure. --Spasage (talk) 19:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages

I see you recently accepted a pending change to January 17 that was lacking a source. I looked for a source for this date of death in the Suicide of Rohith Vemula article and it was unsupported by any source there either.

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.

Please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 21:59, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great thanks.--Spasage (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing criteria

Spasage, Thanks for your time and effort reviewing new pages, including Sentencia Arbitral de Guadalupe. I think the discussion on the Talk page there was profitable, and reached a mutually satisfying conclusion.

Beyond that article, I do have an issue regarding the use of the {{copy edit}} tag in general, by reviewers who generously donate their time, but who may not be in a position to accurately assess the grammar, spelling, style, or tone of an article on en-wiki due to their non-native ability in English. I'm not sure what the article reviewer standards have to say about this, but in my view, the guideline ought to advise non-native speakers to avoid use of the {{copy edit}} tag, and rely on the other maintenance cleanup tags, where appropriate, instead. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:02, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is en wikipeida, so I am assuming that articles should be written in good English. There are many people who re-write articles to meet english language standards. Putting cleanup tag helps to improve an article and by no means discourage anyone to stop editing. --Spasage (talk) 00:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; absolutely. Was just trying to suggest avoidance of the {{copy edit}} tag by reviewers who might not be up to it, but you do whatever you feel is right to improve the article, as we all do.

Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Spasage (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted

Hi Spasage. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback should never be used to edit war.
If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! TonyBallioni (talk) 15:32, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyBallioni: Thanks.

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Why did you delete this article (Arkavanshi) and in relation to this article I have information that I have a gazette related to the states that confirm this article I have a gazette that is not online but its copy is not being uploaded due to this reason, the thing written about the arkavansh article is true JinSHOCK81 (talk) 05:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit in 'Sanskrit'

What action did you take with my edit? It says: Reverted 1 pending edit by Srdtheking to revision 820649474 by Dbachmann. What does this mean? Please care to tell because this was my first edit. Srdtheking (talk) 09:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sergey Brin

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sergey_Brin&diff=next&oldid=821493612

Would you mind giving a reason why his highly cited academic work is not worth including and not just reverting without comment? Thank you.

It shows that he was on a good way of obtaining the PhD before he became too busy with Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.12.68.27 (talk) 08:09, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give reference of statement "... he published a number of papers .. ". I know you gave reference of 2 papers and his area of research. But, reference of above statement will be good. You probably need to change wording slightly to remove or provide reference. Let me know if I have answered your concern.--Spasage (talk) 14:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DBLP: http://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/b/Brin:Sergey ACM: https://dl.acm.org/author_page.cfm?id=81100070777 (these links are already in the authority control section of Sergey Brin). The papers I gave there all had DOIs, and VLDB and SIGMOD are tier-1 conferences.

Yes, they seems reliable. --Spasage (talk) 14:16, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yolanda Saldívar

Hello. You seemed to accept this edit. What am I missing? Politrukki (talk) 08:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has some formatting issues. --Spasage (talk) 14:36, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know and I reverted the edit. But why did you accept it? Politrukki (talk) 08:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Dow Jones

Hello Spasage. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dow Jones, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Check the edit history — A recent edit just removed the redirect. Thank you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thanks.--Spasage (talk) 21:18, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Stock market crashes in India

Hello Spasage. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Stock market crashes in India, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I can clearly identify the subject, a stock market crash is definitely a claim of significance, and the Indian stock market crashing has not been made up in school one day. Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Spasage, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

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

New Year Backlog Drive results:

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

General project update:

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

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

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing over 500 reviews during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping out at New Page Patrol! There is still work to do to meet our long term goals, so I hope you will continue your great work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 02:56, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Insertcleverphrasehere: Thanks.--Spasage (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted Changes??

Hey just a quick question, why did you revert the edits I made on the Swimming page? I am a part of the swimming community and made changes based on both recent news (the article is terribly out of date) and actual, cited knowledge. Mycatisnamedlunameowmeowmeow (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Zaid Ali (February 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nihlus was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Zaid Ali and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Zaid Ali, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Nihlus 22:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Spasage! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Nihlus 22:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Zuma

Hi Spasage, why did you revert my Zuma edit? He did resign after being recalled. Fudpukker (talk) 21:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He has resigned. Search internet or any news website. --Spasage (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject Pakistan

Welcome!

Hello! You look like someone who might be interested in joining WikiProject Pakistan, and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you help us :-) samee ^talk 12:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm from WikiProject Pakistan. We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much — or little — you like:

You can give your input on issues at the project's main discussion page and keep it on your watchlist: Wikipedia talk:Notice board for Pakistan-related topics.
You can add the project's to do list to your watchlist and help in what interests you.
You can !vote and work on saving articles that are up for deletion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Pakistan.
Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every Pakistan-related article on Wikipedia.
Can you code? The automation department uses automated and semi-automated methods to perform batch tasks that would be tedious to do manually.
Please participate in any of our descendant workgroups that might interest you.
Add your name in the members' list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan/Members. There's also a user box template which you can put on your user page to identify yourself as a member: {{User WikiProject Pakistan}}

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me or at the Wikiproject Pakistan noticeboard, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around!

Nomination of Arif Nizami for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arif Nizami is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arif Nizami until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Saqib (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Azhar Abbas (journalist) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Azhar Abbas (journalist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azhar Abbas (journalist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Saqib (talk) 12:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance

Hi Spasage, fisrtly thank you so much for considering me for detection. It's a big honour for me. Nextly, the first article you mentioned (Arif Nizami) is a stub and I'll look around on the web to find some more significant facts about him. But besides being a stub, the article's present contents still need to aligned. The article starts by mentioning his former occupation, however, as per WP: Manual of Style, it'd be more sophisticated to start article by mentioning his current occupation. So the article should look like this,

Arif Nizami is founder and editor of Pakistan Today and had formally served as editor for The Nation. He is son of Hameed Nizami, founder of Nawa-i-Waqt, and nephew of Majid Nizami, chief editor and publisher of the same publication group. Arif left The Nation after disagreement with his uncle Majid and subsequently founded Pakistan Today in 2010.

I'll give my review on the other articles soon. Best of luck Amirk94391 (talk) 15:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Amirk94391:thanks. Can you please give feedback for keep in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arif Nizami --Spasage (talk) 15:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You just asked 27 people to !vote keep on an AfD, it's not clear why you chose them, but you might consider reading WP:CANVASS before doing it again. Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Prince of Thieves: these people worked on similar articles. But I do not understand your urge to write my statement all over the place. You could have written on my talk page, if you had issues. --Spasage (talk) 15:25, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's there for other people to read also. Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:28, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a secret. But, your pointing this out and writing like this, is very odd.--Spasage (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It may as well be a secret if you don't point out what you did on the AfD. Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A friendly word of caution

tag

Please look into this article [1] which has more than 20 citations including reliable ones such as Business Recorder, Dawn, Express Tribune, BBC which are leading newspaper dailys. If there are one or two unrealiable sources or there as mentioned in the tags by a user who hasnt replied to on the page's talk page ever since applyinh these tags, the tags should be specifically placed at specific places where the problem lies. To generalise the whole article by placing tags on top of the article affects the credibility of the whole article itself which is unfair (45.116.232.56 (talk) 17:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC))[reply]

March 2018

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

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

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Saqib (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply User_talk:Saqib#Articles_of_people_not_notable. --Spasage (talk) 13:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gulbahar Bano

Hello Spasage,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Gulbahar Bano for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:51, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Plan 9 (startup incubator)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Plan 9 (startup incubator). Because you're involved in Pakistani-related articles in recent time so, you're invited to participate to get a thorough consensus. Störm (talk) 07:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

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

ACTRIAL:

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

Paid editing

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

Subject-specific notability guidelines

The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

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

News

The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Black Kite (talk) 23:15, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should have discussed this with me before putting it on the board. It says "Before posting a grievance about a user here, please consider discussing the issue with them on their user talk page." Thanks. --Spasage (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need to

read about arguments to avoid at deletion discussions.Best,~ Winged Blades^Godric 04:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can reply you on the discussion. I know what I am talking about. I have as much right to disagree as you. Thanks. --Spasage (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When several editors who are far more experienced than you, are requesting/telling you to re-evaluate your workflow and/or notability-standards coupled with your understanding of our guidelines, it may be prudential to give an ear.Anyways, that's wholly your choice but be cautious about the path you thread, for I'm afraid that shall you persist,we'll be soon back to ANI.Best, ~ Winged Blades^Godric 15:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My vote in deletions is just one vote, there are others who are voting. But what I see here is aggressive behavior if you disagree with them. Go to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Pakistan and see how editors go after anyone who disagree with them. Last time when I checked wikipedia was about consensus, not aggressive editing which is being done in articles related to Pakistan. If you do not like my vote, there are others who are supporting you, what you are worried about. But attempts to silence people is not good for wikipeida and accusing people of coordination etc, it is simply bad. It seems like you and few other editors are doing this. --Spasage (talk) 15:22, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

Per consensus formed here you are topic banned from all deletion discussions (known on en.wiki as "XfD"). The ban can be appealed on WP:AN or WP:ANI in not less than three months. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have also removed your new page reviewer right per the same consensus. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In case there was any confusion, I want to clarify the topic ban includes all deletion discussions, including deletions for review and requests for deletion. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN:, there is an article (Right_Bank_Outfall_Drain) for deletion which I created. Can I comment on that.--Spasage (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry, no exceptions were specified in the discussion. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:21, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Can I appeal this ban. --Spasage (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can; please see WP:UNBAN. It explains procedures for appealing. Cheers ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 20:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are two AFDs Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Right_Bank_Outfall_Drain and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Left_Bank_Outfall_Drain. I have created both of them and user User:Saqib proposed both for deletion. There is no discussion on both of them (only one comment so far). I do not know if user has proposed them in retaliation or for some other reason, in any case, there should be proper review and discussion. --Spasage (talk) 18:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Spasage: What do you mean by retaliation? Explain it. --Saqib (talk) 04:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Are you really asking an individual to overturn community sanction? Given your history of disruption in AfDs, those AfDs concerning non-notable subjects are better without you. You had to already realize it, but you are just WP:NOTGETTINGIT. With this continued disruption and assumption of bad faith around, you are only making it worse for yourself. You have already met all of the requirements for a WP:CIR block and now you are only exhausting community's patience. Capitals00 (talk) 12:58, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I totally respect community's decision and there is no way I want or will disrupt articles or AFDs. Thanks. --Spasage (talk) 14:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK and stop accusing me unnecessarily. --Saqib (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request re-review of Samoon Ahmad, MD page

Could you possibly review Samoon Ahmad, MD page again? I have developed the page since your deletion notation and addressed initial reference and nobility concerns. Thank-you, MegEng (talk) 16:33, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MegEng:, try to establish that he is notable in his area, remove dead links, add some reference which talks about him and his profile. --Spasage (talk) 15:40, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you - I will look into your suggestionsMegEng (talk) 19:59, 11 April 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Spasage - you mentioned dead links. I did some reading and wanted to know if any specific links stand out on Samoon Ahmad, MD page? For example, some links go to PDF documents, should I put page number references? In one link, I am forcing the viewer to click on another link once you arrive at the reference page (however I made a notation of this on the reference line). Your talk page is appears very popular so I realize your time is limited - however, any advice you can give would be appreciated. Thank youMegEng (talk) 05:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article looks good. Biggest concern will continue to be notability. --Spasage (talk) 15:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bibi Pak Daman

This revert is maybe wrong. The image shows the building in Multan, the article is about the building in Lahore. Its confusing because the name is nearly the same. --Migebert (talk) 15:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This means image is wrongly labeled. I have remove this from the article. Thanks for pointing it out. --Spasage (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ARBIPA sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Kautilya3 (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3: What is this? --Spasage (talk) 17:00, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an alert, that anymore this kind of disruption will result in topic ban or block. Capitals00 (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback abuse

Do this[2] again, and I will ask someone to remove rollback from your account. You are already walking on a thin ice since you got topic banned and your New page reviewer right removed following the ANI complaint.[3] Capitals00 (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No intention of disruption. Major changes were made, I did not find a lot of justification for the changes. I know the background of this better after reading notice above. Thanks. --Spasage (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Rollback#When to use rollback. Have you read it? You can't revert those edits that you deem as unjustified unless they are vandalism especially when they have been made on the main article. You have rollback and despite you had to be aware of the rollback policy before requesting and abusing rollback, I am still telling you to read the whole guideline page again. If you really know better than you wouldn't be engaging in this WP:IDHT. Capitals00 (talk) 17:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Capitals00: Thanks for pointing it out. I understand it. --Spasage (talk) 17:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Aslam Khan (Pakistani brigadier) into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is discussed at User_talk:Kautilya3#Rehmatullah_Khan_and_Aslam_Khan_(Pakistani_brigadier). --Spasage (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Right Bank Outfall Drain for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Right Bank Outfall Drain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Right Bank Outfall Drain until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Saqib (talk) 08:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Kulbhushan Jadhav. There is no evidence or universal acceptance of the claim that he was a RAW agent, and for that reason you shouldn't be making this claim at least not when you are trying to present it as a fact. Capitals00 (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See details here User_talk:Capitals00#Insurgency_in_Balochistan_and_Kulbhushan_Jadhav.--Spasage (talk) 16:27, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Toba Tek Singh

Hi Spasage, Yesterday I added some very crucial info about the performances of the story Toba Tek Singh. And to substantiate the info, I had posted a few media links of newspapers who reported the events. Since the additions were completely deleted by you, could I please request you to check the additions again? My credentials and contributions in the art and theatre industry are visible in google search as well. All the major Indian newspapers(60+) have been covering my artistic works and experiments over the last 6 years. Many thanks in advance. Regards, Kamal Pruthi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pruthikamal (talk • contribs) 09:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit looks promotional. Can you please add news paper reference. --Spasage (talk) 15:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Spasage, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Insurgency in Balochistan have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 12:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller:, I wanted to understand what I wrote which caused this message. I can not view my edits which are removed from the history. By any means, can I see what I wrote and what I should have done differently. --Spasage (talk) 15:43, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your text: "

In April 2018, a senior Baloch activist and founder of the American Friends of Balochistan (AFB), Ahmer Mustikhan, claimed that he heckled former Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif during his 2015 visit to Washington "at the behest of Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing" (RAW).[4] Soumya Chowdhury and Krishna Gudipati who supports AFB and are from India, appealed a district court in Maryland to stop Mustikhan from going public about the internal affairs of AFB, which was rejected. According to Mustikhan, Nagesh Bhushan is head of Balochistan desk working in Indian embassy in Washington.[5] The second source says A senior Baloch activist claimed on Tuesday that he heckled former prime minister Nawaz Sharif during his 2015 visit to Washington at the behest of Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW).

The fact that you quoted some of the text that was in the 2nd source, using the first source as a text, doesn't help. Doug Weller talk 16:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Left Bank Outfall Drain for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Left Bank Outfall Drain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Left Bank Outfall Drain until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Saqib (talk) 04:20, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chamankot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abbasi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hyderabad, Sindh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khuda Ki Basti (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of truck art

Hello Spasage, I agree with the rationale for your edit to the article Truck art in South Asia. But I find it a pity that we have nothing about the Origins of truck art, which appears to have been in Pakistan. Since you are familiar with Pakistan and, judging from one of your other edits, even with Urdu, you might be able to shed some light on this. Do you think it might be possible to write about that, so that we could change back the headline? Then, the current history of the term "jingle truck" would become merely a historical side note. ◄ Sebastian 10:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SebastianHelm:Thanks for reaching out to me. Truck_art_in_South_Asia needs a lot of improvement. It is badly written and structure is awful. I just tried to make a small change , but many more changes are needed. Truck_art_in_South_Asia#Jingle_Truck_Origins is just a history, but it is first thing you read on the article. Truck art was there for decades, this term may be a decade old. This article is full of reference and pictures to truck art in Pakistan, but article name try different due to discussion here. So, in nutshell, this article needs major work. --Spasage (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kallar Syedan

its To different Places One is Kallar Syedan Tehsil and 2th is Kallar Syedan City in Category:Kallar Syedan every thing from City onley but in Category:Kallar Syedan tehsil can have every thing from 200+ villages 23 wards and 12 union councils if you Think Category:Kallar Syedan tehsil is best plz let me know i will chang that thanks.--User talk:Saadat Malik 23:49 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I would suggest to make one category "Category:Kallar Syedan tehsil" and put everything related to kallar syedan in it. I can create and arrange categories. You can expand on it.--Spasage (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks --User talk:Saadat Malik 04:08 5 May 2018 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Saadat Malik (talk • contribs) 03:03, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

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

ACTRIAL:

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

Deletion tags

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

Backlog drive:

A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

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

Paid editing - new policy

Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

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

Not English

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

News

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

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hammad Safi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hammad Safi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hammad Safi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:14, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

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

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sultan Rahi has been nominated for discussion

Category:Sultan Rahi, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 21:31, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

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

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Zaid Ali

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Sam Sailor 17:14, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sania Maskatiya

Hello. Thank you for creating articles for Wikipedia.

An article you recently created, Sania Maskatiya, is orphaned, that means no other articles link to it. Although it can still be found by searching Wikipedia, it is preferable that it can be reachable by links from related pages. Therefore, it is helpful to add links form other suitable pages with similar or related information. You may use the find link tool to do so.

I've tagged the article in question with {{orphan}}. If you have added a category to it, you may remove the tag. If you have any questions, you may ask on my talk page, at the Teahouse or help desk. Happy editing! —AE (talk • contributions) 14:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

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

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js^(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget.
In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions.
MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues.
User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js^(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page)
User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js^(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50).
User:Primefac/revdel.js^(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you.
User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js^(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link.
User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion.
User:Evad37/rater.js^(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Nomination of Hammad Safi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hammad Safi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hammad Safi (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Knightrises10 (talk) 13:07, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

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

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Spasage,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Spasage. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Spasage,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Orientls (talk) 06:25, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Based on the evidence presented at WP:ANI, I have blocked you for violating your topic ban on deletion discussions. When you return to productive editing in a week, please be scrupulous in avoiding deletion discussions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:35, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Spasage (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is not correct that I violated tban since it was enforced. User Orientls is talking about a discussion, which I had with other contributor. I did not realized that tban was for all the AFDs not just Pakistan related. I have contributed positively to wiki since and before tban. It was a mistake on my part. I disagree with the tban but I would not violate it. If user Orientls brought this to my attention, I would have reverted my vote. But that is past. I request to lift this block. Apart from tban and this block, I was never involved in anything like this. Thanks. Spasage (talk) 18:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Above here, on this page - in the heading "Topic Ban", NeilN was EXTREMELY clear ( In case there was any confusion, I want to clarify the topic ban includes all deletion discussions, including deletions for review and requests for deletion. --NeilN talk to me 15:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)). You even asked a follow-up question, to which you were told No, sorry, no exceptions were specified in the discussion. --NeilN talk to me 20:21, 23 April 2018 (UTC). You have clearly violated the topic ban here: [6]. I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. SQL ^{Query me!} 18:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Saleem Ahmed (poet) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Saleem Ahmed (poet), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Britishfinance (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Spasage,

News

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

Discussions of interest

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

Reminders

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

NPP Tools Report

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

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

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

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

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Spasage,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

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

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

Reliable Sources for NPP

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

Backlog drive coming soon

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

News

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

Discussions of interest

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

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

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

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Spasage,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

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

QUALITY of REVIEWING

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

Backlog

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

Move to draft

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

Notifying users

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

PERM

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

Other news

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

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

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

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

Your draft article, Draft:Saleem Ahmed (poet)

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Spasage,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

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

This month's refresher course

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

Deletion tags

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

Paid editing

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

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

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

Not English

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

Tools

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Mashood Alam" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mashood Alam. Since you had some involvement with the Mashood Alam redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:18, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Akhuwat (Microfinance)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Akhuwat (Microfinance). Since you had some involvement with the Akhuwat (Microfinance) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:48, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This edit violated your topic ban on participating in deletion discussions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:19, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello Spasage,

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

Getting the queue to 0

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

Coordinator

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

This month's refresher course

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

Tools

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

Reviewer Feedback

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

Second set of eyes

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

Arbitration Committee

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

Community Wish list

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

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

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

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Reviewer of the Year

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

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

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

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

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days
Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

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

Redirect autopatrol

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

Source Guide Discussion

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

This month's refresher course

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

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Spasage,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello Spasage,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Iffat Rahim for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Iffat Rahim is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iffat Rahim (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Hello Spasage,

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	DannyS712 bot III (talk)	67,552	Patrol Page Curation
2	Rosguill (talk)	63,821	Patrol Page Curation
3	John B123 (talk)	21,697	Patrol Page Curation
4	Onel5969 (talk)	19,879	Patrol Page Curation
5	JTtheOG (talk)	12,901	Patrol Page Curation
6	Mcampany (talk)	9,103	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	6,401	Patrol Page Curation
8	Mccapra (talk)	4,918	Patrol Page Curation
9	Hughesdarren (talk)	4,520	Patrol Page Curation
10	Utopes (talk)	3,958	Patrol Page Curation

Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)