User talk:Whispering/Archive eight

Deleted Article

Hi
I created my first article on a non profit organization called Rush Soccer but the page was denied and deleted before I had time to address the matter. By any chance, do you know is there a way to restore the sandbox in order to change the few sentence that needed to be fix so I won't have to go through again the process to code a whole new page (which it is very time consuming when you are newbie like me )
I appreciate your time.

--Pelo1007 (talk) 07:13, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your article was a copyright violation. Even if you did ask the deleting admin RHaworth to save it to your userspace he wouldn't because it was a copyright violation. The best thing you could do is just start over again from scratch. Whispe ring 21:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External Links and WP:BLPPROD

Hi, please don't use BLPPROD on articles that have external links on them, as you did here: Special:diff/819178073, as external links count as sources and BLPPROD is only to be used where there are no sources at all. A WP:PROD, or an appropriate WP:CSD are the correct methods for uncontroversial deletion of BLP's that have at least 1 source on them. Thanks. Iffy★Chat -- 09:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't know external links were sources now. That seems kinda silly, oh well. Whispe ring 23:10, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Population of Traverse City

The current census estimate of the population of Traverse City is only around 15,500. The 143,000 number is for the Traverse City micropolitan area, which includes all of Benzie, Grand Traverse, Kalkaska and Leelanau counties, an area that include another city and 12 villages plus 48 townships. Imzadi 1979 → 04:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, you are right. If you want delete it I won't protest. Whispe ring 04:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sricity Nature Society

Hi, Sricity Nature Society is a is a non profit organisation founded by a group of nature lovers in Sri City. SNS promotes appreciation, education and conservation of Nature. its similar to Nature Forever Society

I was just adding more details to it when you nominated it for deletion. Request you to kindly remove the deletion nomination. Shmilyshy 05:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC) thank you.[reply]

19:52:43, 20 January 2018 review of submission by Smpmp01

Smpmp01 (talk · contribs)
- User:Smpmp01/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for your feedback. With respect to citations, am I correct in thinking that what I really need are references to PRINT publications that substantiate the statement I make in the text. For example, if I say he was head of the School of Music at a university, I would want to cite a print publication that supports that statement?

Also, there are some things that do not exist in print. For example in this case, published software programs or musical scores being offered online by publishers who no longer mail out printed catalogs. Is there no way to use an external link for those?

Smpmp01 (talk) 19:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, you don't need all print references the reliable source page will give you more information. And as far as the external links go I think you are confusing references and external links. Whispe ring 05:16, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

David Davies Memorial Institute

We had an edit conflict by both declining the draft at the same time and both reporting the account as promotional at the same time. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:37, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Whispe ring 21:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:50:58, 29 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Scairp4

Scairp4 (talk · contribs)
- User:Scairp4/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Whispering! Thank you for reviewing the article (biography) I submitted. The subject fulfills several of the criteria for notable persons (academics) (e.g. holds a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution, is an elected member of several prestigious scientific associations (e.g. AAAS, AE, EMBO)) - I will add more references to verify this. In the section 'Scientific interests', what is needed in addition to the references I included? I already included references to his major findings which are published in leading peer-reviewed journals (e.g. Science, Nature) and external links to Scopus and Google scholar where one can find his h-index and citation record, as well as the institute's website, etc. Could you advise me how I can improve this, please? I look forward to your feedback! Scairp4 (talk) 15:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC) Scairp4 (talk) 15:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whispering. Articles on academics need to meet WP:PROF which uses a somewhat different set of criteria from most articles on people. The content of the article on Stainier shows that he meets those criteria since he is a fellow of the AAAS. It does need rewriting, but clearly shows notability. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did a spot check and didn't see any references hence the review. If you feel that strongly about the draft just put it up for review again. Whispe ring 23:26, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Thank You
		Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 05:48, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Worm Gear
		For maintaining a streak of at least 10 reviews per week during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog drive, you are awarded the worm gear. Thanks for your contributions and keep up the good work! — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 05:48, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: The Companion Magazine

Hello Whispering. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Companion Magazine, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 cannot be applied to magazines, try WP:PROD or WP:AFD if a merger/redirect to the publishing entity is not feasible. Thank you. So Why 12:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Denied Article

Hi
I created an article Draft:Moozlie, however it was denied due to referencing the person's website. I have addressed the issue but I have received no feedback. I was advised to merge Draft:Nomuzi_Mabena to Draft:Moozlie, would like assistance with that.

--Nelisa85 (talk) 08:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty the best place to ask for help is at the help desk. Whispe ring 22:56, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

saud

hi look page for saud

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Saud_Abdullah_Al-Qahtani

Mohammed T (talk) 04:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 05:08:19, 5 February 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by ZenaDC-Logal

ZenaDC-Logal (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Opt IN USA (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Whispering: Hopefully you agree that is helpful for us to address the impression you have shared of our proposed article. Our goal is to comply with Wikipedia's publishing guidelines and a condition precedent to accomplishing that goal is, of course, you being of the impression that it has been accomplished. Frankly, Opt IN USA's administrators were surprised and disappointed that our overview merely describing Opt IN USA, its objectives, and contentions (clearly identified as such) were dismissed as advertisement-like. Our Wikipedia draft is meant to create public awareness of Opt IN USA (as other Wikipedia entries have seemed to do with regard to other social justice movements), not hard sell or prove related contentions. Additional guidance from you as to what language suggests otherwise would be very much appreciated.

Also, please note that Opt IN USA's contentions are very much premised on independent, reliable, published sources -- a fact that would be clear from our draft if our intent was to detail as opposed to merely reference those contentions and direct our Wikipedia audience to related white papers. Naturally we don't intend for our Wikipedia entry to duplicate Opt IN USA's extensive publications that cite similarly researched writings (some peer-reviewed) of the campaign's sister organizations and leaders. Is it not enough for Wikipedia to verify that Opt IN USA is in fact an ongoing campaign with the objectives and contentions credited to it by our proposed Wikipedia article? All the citations needed to accomplish that task have been provided.

Finally, it is difficult to imagine that America's position on the Optional Protocols of two (2) of its most prominent human rights treaties would not be considered a notable subject and/or that the existence of the U.S. legal/judicial system reform movement from which Opt IN USA evolved would not be considered a notable subject. Does Wikipedia contend otherwise?

Your consideration and assistance are very much appreciated. Thank you. Opt IN USA administrators look forward to your response. ZenaDC-Logal (talk) 05:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem here is that you think that Wikipedia is a social network it's not. Wikipedia isn't here to raise public awareness, for any cause. Wikipedia is here to present the facts. Whispe ring 02:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I sought to understand why the Opt IN USA draft is not being perceived as factual. After all, the allegations and contentions it references are clearly identified as such. What I discovered is that the draft should qualify as a Wikipedia article barring a "notability" problem per the guidance at "Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)" @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies). As the Opt IN USA draft indicates, Opt IN USA is a project of National Judicial Conduct and Disability Law Project, Inc. (NJCDLP) which meets Wikipedia's "notability" criteria. So, unless you recommend a different approach, the Opt IN USA draft will be revised to establish NJCDLP's notability and the corresponding notability of its initiative, Opt IN USA. Then the draft will proceed with its description of Opt IN USA, tweaked to strengthen the neutral, facts-only approach it currently takes with citations to sources confirming its representations. Again, thank you for your consideration. ZenaDC-Logal (talk) 04:52, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Tjebbe van Tijen

Hello Whispering. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tjebbe van Tijen, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: previous (revdel'd) version contained plenty of claims of significance and a short GNews/GBooks search indicates that significance might well exist. Use WP:AFD instead. Thank you. So Why 09:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10:47:56, 5 February 2018 review of submission by Tumaihi9

Tumaihi9 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Saud Abdullah Al-Qahtani (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Tumaihi9 (talk) 10:47, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of travel books

Hi Whispering, I'm puzzled by your recent edit because it in fact deleted the article. I had moved it back to its original place. Rwood128 (talk) 10:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:52:50, 7 February 2018 review of submission by Theokarfak

Theokarfak (talk · contribs)
- User:Theokarfak/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Theokarfak (talk) 18:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC) Hello just wanted to ask the reasons as to why you believe this article reads more like an advertisement, I mean precise reasons as much as possible, thank you in advance Theokarfak (talk) 18:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because of phrases like "environmental justice", it's just not written in a formal encyclopedic tone. You might want to check out WP:PEACOCK. Whispe ring 22:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Whispering, 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)

WP:BROADCONCEPT

Hi, please don't add disambiguation templates to pages that are clearly WP:BROADCONCEPT pages, like Rohingya persecution in Myanmar. If you are having trouble telling which pages are ambiguous and which are broad concepts, please ask the experts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation. Thanks. bd2412 T 01:08, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

21:18:15, 15 February 2018 review of submission by 24.239.85.25

24.239.85.25 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Black Privilege (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

24.239.85.25 (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

please review this and accept it and i will retype it myself to better page. thank you for your time

09:40:15, 2 March 2018 review of submission by 202.142.113.137

202.142.113.137 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Drishti Ekhon: A Cultural Revolution (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

202.142.113.137 (talk) 09:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rastislav Michal Page Page submission Refusal

Yes, Whispering, all the sources in my document are pamphlets or books created by the artist himself.

I personally met the artist in Prague and he commented that he couldn’t provide more information about publishers, etc. since these catalogues were done by him for his solo or collaborative exhibitions.

I hope this helps. I would like to create this page to give this painter and print maker more recognition, especially for English speaking readers.

Thanks for your help, Whispering.

Bigmigs67 Bigmigs67 (talk) 05:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello Whispering, 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]

Select Survey Invite

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_a9j8VZu3c3EvqaF&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 12:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello Whispering, 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]

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Whispering, 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]

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

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

Hello Whispering, 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]

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello Whispering, 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]

About you declining my article

Since you didn't reply to my argument on my talk page as to why the Nintendo Switch Pro Controller should be an article, I've decided to leave that message here, "The Wii U Pro Controller has its own article despite it being shorter than my draft, so I don't see why the Nintendo Switch Pro Controller can't have its own article. It's better to have information solely about the pro controller on its own article rather than have a short paragraph overview of the Pro controller on the Nintendo Switch Wikipedia article." 344917661X (talk) 19:15, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest if that came up for AfC I would of declined it as well. Whispe ring 12:55, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Country Mike's Greatest Hits

Hi you declined the CSD G4 for the above. I have already restored the redirect and it was reverted more than once hence the G4. If the redirect is removed again what do we do? If it been deleted and redirected then there would be no history to revert to each time. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:01, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Domdeparis: Well the admin checking the speedy would likely just restore the redirect. If the person keeps removing the redirect you could ask for protection over at Requests for page protection. Whispe ring 20:22, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits

Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI: "Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Beeblebrox (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

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

Hello Whispering, 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]

Request on 18:45:53, 24 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Sdwarren

Sdwarren (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Evergreen Credit Union (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, Can you take a look at our submission again? We've input a number of references with verifiable sources. Thanks!

Sdwarren (talk) 18:45, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UAA reports

While reporting is always appreciated, I have just declined several of your reports at UAA. The username policy has numerous nuances that can make it tricky to navigate. The bits relevant to your reports:

UAA is only for names so obvious they merit an immediate block with no prior discussion.
WP:ORGNAME only applies to names that clearly and unambiguously represent an organization, product, or website. Names that kind of seem like they might be connected are not blatant violations and therefore not blockable. You can try discussing such borderline cases directly with the user, and if that does not achieve a satisfactory result, file at WP:RFCN so that a consensus may be reached.
Real names of people who are not notable are not blockable, including the “official” accounts of such persons. For some reason a lot of folks from certain parts of the world seem to feel a need to create their “official” account here before someone else takes it. It’s pretty silly but not a violation of the username policy.

Hope that helps. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Central African lion

Thanks for your attempt for temporary full protection of this page!! I highly appreciate this. Alas, the other editor insists on keeping false information in there, despite repeated requests to respond to issues I raised on the talk page, see also Talk:Central_African_lion#MISinterpreting_sources and the two previous sections re Cameroon lion and Congo lion. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Nissan Terrano

Please undelete the article, HPEV Solar Fuel Cell

RobertBercovitz (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2018 (UTC) thank-you.[reply]

@RobertBercovitz: Well I cannot revert deleted articles as I am not a admin. However, if you mean your draft HPEV Solar Fuel Cell it's still there and can be worked upon. --Whispe ring 20:34, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Whispering. RobertBercovitz (talk) 21:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:49:33, 2 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Bonjours1234

Bonjours1234 (talk · contribs)
- User:Bonjours1234 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi

I created a page which was reviewed by you and found to have infringed copyright. I can correct that but it seems the page has ben deleted. How can I retrieve the page to correct the issue?

Thanks

Bonjours1234 (talk) 20:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:14:44, 3 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Xinqizi

Xinqizi (talk · contribs)
- User:Xinqizi/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I tried to set up a new page, called "Ronnarong Khampha", but it was declined.

The reason was "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia."

I understand the problem. I'm now collecting additional sourcing and reference materials. I'll edit and re-submit once I have those. Please do not delete the draft - collecting the reference materials may take a little time.

Xinqizi (talk) 10:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 06:48:03, 12 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Reinaabeja

Reinaabeja (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Carolina Ceca (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reinaabeja (talk) 06:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I corrected the draft, and it has been resubmitted. Please, if you have time, could you check it?

Sikh Dharma: avoiding an edit war

Dear Whispering: You recently reverted an edit to the Sikh Dharma entry, which replaced that page's redirect page with a disambiguation page--a change that was previously posted for discussion on that entry's Talk page. Your edit summary does not address the issues identified for discussion on the Talk page. For the moment I am leaving your reversion in place in hopes of a resolution. I invite you to join me in a substantive discussion at the Talk page to identify why you believe a disambiguation page is inappropriate.

Please note that if this matter is not resolved through the Talk page, I expect to revert your edit and restore the disambiguation page.

- Lapith (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thank you for notifying me, I added sources to the Ahmet Saffet Ohkay draft, kind regards. Redman19 (talk) 16:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About review of draft :Baburam Adhikari

Dear Sir/Madam, respectfully, would you mind to review this article named Baburam Adhikari? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharad87 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 10:27:20, 15 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by AdHoog

AdHoog (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Jennifer Morgan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi there, i'm unsure why this has been rejected as Jennifer Morgan is the international executive director of a well-known organization: Greenpeace https://www.greenpeace.org/international/author/jennifer-morgan/

Furthermore, this is merely a translation of a German page: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Morgan

Please tell me specifically how I can make this page acceptable for publication.

Thank you for any assistance

AdHoog (talk) 10:27, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@AdHoog: The reason I declined it is because it doesn't have any references. Wikipedia needs and I quote the decline reason: "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." So, add some references, cite them and submit it again. --Whispering^(talk) 13:05, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

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

Hello Whispering,

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, Whispering. 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]

Talkback

Hello, Whispering. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
Message added 20:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Investitions bank berlin

I did, now i wait the article back to wikipedia. By the way, there are malicious administrators who have behind them 500,000 articles deleted in wikipedia in English.--Chochorico (talk) 15:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Whispering. Would you mind taking a look at Investitionsbank Berlin? Is it the same version you draftified? It's pretty promotional in nature, and it doesn't really seem ready for the mainspace; the creator, however, has been indef'd which means draftifying it again might just end turning into a WP:G13 in six months. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly Yeah, it's pretty much the same article albeit with some references now. Whispering^(t) 13:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Since the creator has been indefinitely blocked, I'm not sure if draftifying it again is a viable option. Do you think it can be left as is, or should it be brought to AfD? Googling the bank's name gets a fair amount of hits, but most of them seem to be to websites in German; so, I'm not sure how reliable they are for English Wikipedia's purpose. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marchjuly Really it's up to you but sources on the English Wikipedia don't have to be in english, it's prefered for obvious reasons but not mandatory. If you think it will be deleted at AfD go ahead and AfD it. Sorry for the long reply I got busy at work. Whispering^(t) 16:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking another look. I've asked a few WikiProject about this, so mayve someone will know where to find some better/additional sources. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Martial law in Ukraine

Hallo, I came across this article while stubsorting earlier today, and it got onto my watchlist because I created its talkpage. Please move it back to mainspace: it had several good reliable sources, though they were listed as "External links" and didn't show their true nature. I've upgraded the formatting of those refs so that they now show where they came from. They don't perhaps source the exact list of 10 named oblasts, but I think the rest is well sourced and ought to be in main space before someone else creates a duplicate article. I can't move it myself because you edited the redirect. Can you? If not I'll have to ask for admin assistance. Thanks. PamD 16:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More: thinking about it, I'm pretty sure you can't move it, and you don't seem to be online, so will ask at WP:AN. PamD 16:57, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Whispering! You created a thread called TV Channels and WP:GNG at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 17:40:12, 10 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Shannah78

Shannah78 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:PDF OCR X (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I got the idea that I should have a wikipedia page due to the fact that many of our competitors seem to have one. E.g. ABBYY_FineReader

I used this wiki page as a starting point for our own, trying to be as objective as that page appears to be. Can you you help me to identify the key differences between that page and my submission so that I can amend the submission to meet standards?

Shannah78 (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Declined article: Brighton and Hove local election, 2019

I saw you rejected this piece for being too soon, but I wanted to know why this was rejected whilst there are several others that deal with specific local elections next year which have been approved. I've not tried to predict the future here; I was creating a page for a scheduled event of notable importance. I've already been in touch with several political parties to find out whether they'll be running in this area to help improve the piece. I hope you can enlighten me as to why mine was rejected and others, which contain as much (or little if you wish to be critical) as mine have been approved. ~~~~ dgreenbrighton (talk) 00:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Dgreenbrighton: I don't deal with other pages I deal with pages in AfC. It's a clear violation of WP:CRYSTAL. However you do bring up another issue you've been in touch with several political parties which violates no original research. We need secondary sources to have articles posted on Wikipedia. Whispering^(t) 14:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Whispering,

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.

Please don't move articles to draft space for missing sources

Hi there. Per WP:NEXIST, insufficient sourcing is not a reason for removal of content from mainspace. If a subject can plausibly be sourced, it is allowed to stay in mainspace even if it is not sourced at the moment. Also, I noted multiple times that you moved pages that contained previously merged or copied text, breaking attribution which is also against policy. Regards So Why 16:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]