User talk:Jcc/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

altucher link

why are you deleting the yahoo finance link on the altucher page? Cyberwonka (talk) 23:50, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cyberwonka: That's a bit disingenuous. I also personally disagree with his morals but especially since this is a biography of a living person, with a history of extreme COI editing, you'll need more than one Yahoo Finance source (which doesn't explicitly call him out) to back up calling him a "con artist, hustler and flim flam man". jcc (tea and biscuits) 00:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Süleyman the Magnificent's Venetian Helmet

Johnbod - Jcc, many thanks indeed for sorting all that out. Quite beyond my technical powers! I think we've now got a nice Start on an interesting niche topic, and I think others may well help to expand it. Sometime, I shall go and brush up the sourcing. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 18:08, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

scan artist

There are many people on the web who speculate he is not on it. How should I document that on his page here? Cyberwonka (talk) 00:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cyberwonka: What you should do is write down your proposed changes, with sources that are reliable (e.g. not self published blogs) on the article talk page, which can be accessed here: Talk:James Altucher. Then another editor can look at the sources, and the information and decide if it breaches WP:BLP policy or not, is worthy of inclusion and not undue. Word of warning- I wouldn't describe him as a "flim-flam man" as you did before. jcc (tea and biscuits) 18:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Your comment on Walukuba Estate

Thank you for your comment on my Talk page about Walukuba Estate. I intend to go get pictures soon and add them. I also didn't know - didn't check well enough - that I could create an article without submitting to Articles for Creation. Thanks for letting me know. Cartney23 (talk) 19:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

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) 05:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
One of your comments on... a recent Arbcom case... made me giggle. Sarky git ;) -- Thanks, Alfie. talk to me | contribs 02:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Civility in infobox discussions case opened

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 17, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Redundant link in your evidence section

  • He uses this to claim that his edit is therefore not bold, and reverts and becomes uncivil when challenged on this point, or edit wars to keep it removed. [1] [2] [3] [4]
[1] and [2] are the same diff. wbm1058 (talk) 15:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
@Wbm1058: I've fixed it, thanks! jcc (tea and biscuits) 23:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
[3] is an edit by Casianto. wbm1058 (talk) 01:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Wbm1058: Again, thanks! jcc (tea and biscuits) 22:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Which article did I edit that I did not put a reliable source for? Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 21:13, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Das osmnezz: Over at Rickey Harris you've cited a Wordpress blog, a dead link (that would have led to a self-published fan website), and a forum post, none of which are reliable sources. jcc (tea and biscuits) 21:22, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Font draft

Hi Jcc, you reject the draft for font, I am intelligent for fonts. You rejected the review like this one. You search it on Google. --Cyrus noto3at bulaga (Talk to me) 01:05, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

@Cyrus noto3at bulaga: No, the onus is on you to "search for it", and cite relevant sources. I find absolutely nothing that demonstrate that this font is notable. jcc (tea and biscuits) 13:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Stagecoach mosaic

Hello. Certainly, I'll get to work on it this week. Cloudbound (talk) 22:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

All done. Cloudbound (talk) 14:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks! jcc (tea and biscuits) 14:17, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

gwr main photo

Hi

How is the main image awful, when its so small its barely noticeable? Secondly its been up for 28 days, if it had been up for 2 or 3 days and someone changed it I wouldn't have an issue, but its been up for nearly a month, it just seems pointless. I want to revert your re-edit, but I'm guessing that would cause more issues, as the replacement provided is pretty poor itself. To be honest, I think its just better to remove the main image once and for all, the GWR page has a lot of issues with this, mainly childish trainspotters! I am being blunt about this because I fed up with the constant interfering, meddling, and disorganisation on that page, there is plenty of other things that could be fixed, rather than wasting time, and creating talent, on one stupid photo!209.93.106.208 (talk) 01:07, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I thought the problem was that you felt it was being changed too regularly? Photos are changed as and when new ones come along, and at the moment GWR are changing the liveries on their trains and introducing new rolling stock, so inevitably there will be changes. I feel like you are taking this change out of all proportion and risk falling into what you claim is happening with the change/revert cycle. I'd recommend that you take a step back, drop the accusations and focus on creating content like you suggest. Sorry for wading in Jcc. Cloudbound (talk) 14:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
What Cloudbound said. jcc (tea and biscuits) 14:10, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

And to respond as before, nothing wrong with the previous image, as for Cloudbound contribution, that's running, the photo before was GWR green IETS, you photo is exactly the same. Its funny that Cloudbound likes to tell me what to do, but when I tell him, he gets confrontational about it. As I said, it will only get changed again, its pathetic, I'm in half a mind to just remove the photo all together, but then I guess you'll claim I'm "vandalising" and get me blocked!! Typical, whatever is alright for you lot can go, whatever others wants, they get screwed over. 194.75.22.48 (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Come on- the photo before clearly isn't the same. It's darker, hard to make out (with poor contrast levels between the trains and the platform structure), fuzzy and as a result does a worse job of illustrating Great Western Railway. Note that I'm all for consistency- here are just some of the instances I've reverted new images that weren't an improvement. Why not create an account?. jcc (tea and biscuits) 18:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

At least with that image you could see the gwr logo on the trains, this one you can't and the new photo looks black not green.194.75.22.48 (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Find another one then. WP:BOLD. jcc (tea and biscuits) 21:57, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Actually, I seem to remember the page used to have a great infobox image of a GWR liveried HST at sunset at the Dawlish sea wall, which looked seriously awesome. I can't seem to find it though. jcc (tea and biscuits) 21:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
That was this one - File:The perils of the late afternoon sun! by Phil Wakely.jpg. Cloudbound (talk) 22:33, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Tom Winsor

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Tom Winsor has been completed.

Two things I found I'll draw to your attention. The first is that " and ' were both used around quotations. There was no consistency. I have converted them all to single quotes which complies with the British English tag.

As well, I have left this paragraph from the HM Chief Inspector of the Constabulary section as is.

On 19 December 2013, the Home Office announced its intention to increase HMIC's annual budget by £9.4 million to enable the Inspectorate to carry out annual, in-depth force inspections on core policing matters in every one of the 43 Home Office police forces in England and Wales, in addition to HMIC's programme of thematic inspections (28 such inspections are being carried out in the current inspection year).[146][147] The design of the new inspection programme is being carried out in close consultation and co-operation with the police service, and will lead to an interim all-force assessment in November 2014, with the first full all-force inspection assessment in November 2015.[148]

I suggest you determine what actually transpired and fix the verb tenses accordingly.

Other than that I think the article is in great shape.

Good luck with the GA review.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Note

I just wanted to reply to your comment here since I've always thought highly of your opinion, and felt it worth engaging. Yes, I actually agree 100% with you that if someone has a valid need (which moving to draft certainly is) and is trusted, we should go ahead and grant the right. In the case you mentioned, I actually ended up granting the permission myself based on a talk page request a few months later. I think the reason we got tighter recently was because we had a few longterm users get the right and either immediately started to make mistakes closing RMs or who used it to bypass RMs. In one of the cases where it was revoked, it eventually led to an editor retiring. That's a situation we obviously want to avoid, and since it's pretty easy to make a TR I think we started getting stricter (Primefac and I being the two ones who have recently monitored that board the most.) As I said on Alex's talk, if we've overcorrected, that's a fair criticism that needs to be taken into account. I certainly don't like PERM being an interrogation and try to prevent it from being so. My criteria for any right is pretty simple: show you meet the criteria, show you need it, and have it be evident from your contributions where it would be useful. If the community is saying that we should have a less strict standard on the last one, so be it. Anyway, wanted to follow up because you always make such good points . TonyBallioni (talk) 00:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Thanks for the kind words and the clarification. Re-reading now the comments seem a bit more blunt than I intended- and they definitely weren't meant as a criticism of you, apologies if it seemed that way! jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:12, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

21:06:54, 26 March 2018 review of submission by Agmacq


Hello, thanks for your note on my submission for Charter School Capital - I have removed a few of the less substantive citations and added several that are more notable, specifically the Portland Business Journal interview with the CEO (not from a press release) and the article from industry publication Charter Schools Today. I appreciate your reconsideration of this submission. Thanks Agmacq (talk) 21:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Agmacq (talk) 21:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Agmacq: Thanks for your message. Unfortunately I can't see all the sources as some are behind paywalls, but from what I can see, I'm not sure all of them are reliable e.g. cpexecutive; I think it's best another reviewer takes a look at it so I've resubmitted it. jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:15, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Transmed (April 5)

Dear JCC,

First of all thank you so much for your feedback. But I am at a complete loss for now.

Let me start again by explaining as to why I've taken this long winded project on. So we are a bunch of expat Lebanese guys that are working on updating the - Companies of Lebanon - section which we believe is missing a lot of the "new" Lebanese companies. So there is not any conflict of interest as you are led to believe. And if you can take a moment and check the companies listed under the companies of Lebanon section, you can see that most listed ones have similar and even less references than what I currently included in the Transmed draft page submitted. To name a few: Bonjus, Gebran Geahchan & Sons, New Wave Productions, and many more.

And to confirm again, Lebanon is a very small country so whatever listings you might have and the notability standards that you might use a a benchmark, will not fit with any global standards, therefore can I please ask you to take this into consideration and check the current "Lebanon" related brands and businesses listings that are available on Wikipedia and compare my article to those!

In terms of the content that I have used on the page, I have adapted that to all the online articles that I have researched and found, so I guess you are telling me that I need to remove all that and have a simple stub page with a name listing?!

I really am at a loss here as this has been dragging on for too long. And just having a Lebanese company invest in a UK established business - the Quiqup story - is a source of pride for me and many of my countrymen. Therefore for me this is an article that I feel strongly about and will see this through with your and the Wikipedia community support.

Therefore can you let me know how best you can and are prepared to help me on this.

Again, thank you.

Tony.bourached (talk) 13:45, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Tony.bourached: Hi Tony. There's a fundamental rule that all topics must be notable to have an article. I know this will be hard to hear, but even if you have no conflict of interest here, the topic that you are writing about simply isn't notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. I've looked through every single source that you've provided, and all I'm seeing is republished press releases or primary sources, both of which cannot be used to establish notability and so if I were to accept this page it would just get later deleted. If you find other pages that you believe don't meet the notability criteria, you can nominate them for deletion. Again, perhaps you might want to host this content on your own blog or website instead? jcc (tea and biscuits) 22:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm going away so I'm afraid I won't be able to respond further Tony, but feel free to ask for a second opinion over at the Teahouse. jcc (tea and biscuits) 22:29, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I was rather hoping you'd see the need to address this without a talk page prod

(Personal attack removed)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

... but it's been a while now, so ...

Why the fuck did you basically accuse me of a BLP violation, here? You really don't get to make accusations like that without any substance, you know? I await your response with some moderate levels of fascination and a great deal of confusion and irritation. -- Begoon 10:20, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

@Begoon and Davey2010: Thank you for your kind, delicately phrased words letting me know of my failure to respond to a comment that you left about my reversion of an infobox image that you tried to add to the article Jessie J. I absolutely agree with you- how dare I fail to respond to your comment, especially given that you made no effort whatsoever to notify me despite your seemingly desperate need for a response.
For someone who spent several edits trying to get the right tone of a month's worth of sheer unbridled fury across in the message you left me, it really is a shame you misread my reversion quite so spectacularly. Not everyone is out to get you- you and I have no previous interactions, and my message (and talk page message, too) said putting the image on was a BLP violation (see here for another editor saying that unflattering images can be BLP violations), not your edit. Davey, an editor who I have had many positive interactions with in the past (and tends not to leave rude talk page messages, but nice Christmas cards instead) agrees that the image is unflattering, so it's certainly not a stretch to describe it as a BLP violation. It seems that you've received a formal warning for your editwarring just today (hours after you apologised to Davey saying you wouldn't do it again) which seems quite fitting.
Oh, and given I've interrupted my holiday to reply to you I think I've gone above and beyond what's required in providing you with a response; I certainly won't be wasting anymore of my time on this matter. jcc (tea and biscuits) 16:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
There was no "personal attack" intended. I'm touchy about being accused of "BLP violation(s)" where my only intent was to improve this encyclopedia, that's all. Perhaps you might be more careful with such accusations in future, or at least explain them better, to avoid hideous overreactions like mine. As far as I can see Davey said he didn't see any "BLP" issue either. Anyway, I went about my reaction in a somewhat ludicrous way and I do apologise for that sincerely. -- Begoon 01:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

17:02:18, 24 April 2018 review of submission by LondonBlue


LondonBlue (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


Dear Editor-

The referenced European Union emissions standards definition that allegedly covers RDE in more detail speaks to broad EU emissions topics: specific emissions (e.g. criteria pollutants and/or regulated Greenhouse Gas (GHG) levels), generic testing cycles, and many other related categories. Further, the term RDE is no longer confined to the EU - it is now being used in China, India, South America, and is being considered in the United States.

I will say again: the RDE - Real Driving Emissions definition must have its own page, so other countries can find it and add to the details of the definition.

RDE has become a stand-alone, global standard, and is no longer a bit player imbedded and footnoted as a sub-topic. There are many of my fellow collaborators globally that will be able to submit additional information, and RDE legislation is being developed for multiple regions around the world.

PLEASE RECONSIDER. Many thanks!

Respectfully submitted....

@LondonBlue: Sure, it may well deserve its own page and looking further for sources online it probably does. The onus is on you however to have enough content to start the article in the first place- otherwise everyone would just make pages consisting of nothing but a title. I said it at the draft itself and I'll say it again- the content on the page is inferior to what is already available on Wikipedia. When we split pages on Wikipedia we ensure that the content on the new page supplements or improves on what is already there. I would suggest splitting the information from the European_emission_standards#"Cycle_beating"_controversy page rather than use the content you wrote. See WP:SPLIT for a guide on how to do so properly. Sorry for the delay in replying. jcc (tea and biscuits) 19:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for article assistance

Dear Jcc-

Thank you for your recent help in keeping an article my students created for their class project from being deleted by a disgruntled student. The student who spent their day deleting the article was reacting to their final grade for the course. It is my belief that their choice to delete the hard work of their fellow classmates was a retaliatory effort to somehow hurt me. I appreciate your and others efforts to ensure that the work of my students is not destroyed without the due process of a community assessment of the importance of the article on the African vulture trade - as I understand the next step this student has taken is to have the page deleted under this categorization.

Thank you again.

Ecoanthjedi (talk) 13:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)ecoanthjedi

Your GA nomination of Tom Winsor

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tom Winsor you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of WPCW -- WPCW (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tom Winsor

The article Tom Winsor you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Tom Winsor for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of WPCW -- WPCW (talk) 14:41, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I don't have the time right now to work on the article, but I will do in the future- clearly my rewrite of the existing prose didn't go far enough, but it's good to see the bits I did add myself were fine. jcc (tea and biscuits) 00:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft cooperation

WikiProject Germany Coordinator here. Please, if you need more help with Germany-related drafts, do not hesitate to drop a line at our talk page. The cooperation on Julia Jäkel was very constructive for both our WikiProjects. –Vami_IV✠ 09:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, much appreciated. jcc (tea and biscuits) 16:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Analytic theology

JCC. Thanks for your help on the Analytic Theology article. The article serves a community of people who work in both theology and philosophy. Critically picking art essays and articles is what they do for a living. I'm sure the comments will come quickly decisively.

jmg5041 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

No problem. jcc (tea and biscuits) 19:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Jcc, 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: Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: 100 review coin, 250 review coin, 500 review coin, 1000 review certificate.
  • 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)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

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

Hello Jcc, 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)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello Jcc, 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
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.
Other
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)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

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

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

Backlog

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

Community Wishlist 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

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

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

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

Hello Jcc,

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)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jcc. 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)

Request on 00:01:06, 21 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Rein Del Rosario


Good day, JCC! I already did all the advise of other editors respectively Jimfbleak and Legacypac to approved this article. I hope you consider to still publish it because I guess it would not be that fair enough if the only reason that it will not be published is because no media yet covered the company. But the company is linked or listed with other websites like how I put the links of sources on the article where it can be founded to make it reliable. Also if you'll search it in search engine there are vast results referring to the company. It don't sell products like majority of the other companies are doing that's why you can not really found it in media cover resources. Company like EnvironaAir Asia is somehow like a joint venture of public government and private sector as it's a third party sampler in making sure that other industrial companies will comply to what's legal and right in protecting the environment. The first of its kind if expose and publish in Wikipedia. It was purposely written to give awareness what is like a third party sampling is doing and why it has to exist. Kindly give chance and consideration to this matter. Thank you very much. Rein Del Rosario (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Rein Del Rosario: Hi Rein. I'm sorry and I know this won't be what you want to hear. This company is not notable enough to qualify for a Wikipedia article. That link goes to a guide, but basically any coverage of a company on here is supposed to be based on being covered in reliable sources, like newspapers, in the form of full articles and not just things like business listings. Unfortunately from the research I've conducted, and the links you've provided the coverage simply isn't there for this company at present. If you find this topic interesting, perhaps you might want to host this content on your own blog or website? All the best, jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:16, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:01:35, 28 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Blythb


Hi, as I understand your view I would also say as its not finished and I'm complying more info on the history of our station. As it was one of the original board of trade rocket brigades established in 1800's and the last of 3 volunteer life brigades still left in the mid 1900's . I believe there is more to come about this wiki and Im asking you to reconsider.

Blythb (talk) 17:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Blythb: If you want a second opinion, you can press the blue resubmit button at the top of your submission. jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:31, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Connie Beauchamp Casualty.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Jcc,

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.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.


Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.


Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 09:44:01, 12 February 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Lcconti


Hi - I recently edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Multiple_Intelligence_International_School, and you originally declined it. Can you please see now if it can be created?

Thank you so much

Lcconti (talk) 09:44, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


Lcconti (talk) 09:44, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Jcc,

News
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)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Jcc,

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
Discussions of interest

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)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Jcc,

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)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Jcc,

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)

Proposals regarding AfC & NPP

You are invited to comment at discussion currently taking place at Relationship of Articles for Creation and New Page Reviewer for pre-opinion on the combined functions of Articles for Creation (AfC) and New Page Review (NPR).

This mass message invitation is being sent to subscribed members of the work group at the project The future of NPP and AfC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jcc/Archive_7&oldid=1140494209"