User talk:Drm310

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is Drm310's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Shortcuts

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

Speedy Deletion

Apologies for the infraction of Wikipedia policies, as this is my first article. Is it possible that I may have my article directly sent to me in a way that keeps it in tact but unpublished so that it does not conflict any policies? Is the archived version available? If so please let me know.

Thank You Lalschalaune (talk) 10:07, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lalschalaune: You can ask for the text to be restored to your user sandbox or the draft article space by submitting a request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. However, there are two things you must be aware of first.

You appear to be affiliated with this organization, so for you to write about it is an inherent conflict of interest. In addition, if you are in a paid position with this organization, then you would be considered a paid editor by Wikipedia's compulsory paid editing disclosure policy. Please review both of these links and make any required disclosures of your affiliation with this organization before making any other edits.

Secondly, not every organization that exists is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. An organization has to be notable by Wikipedia's definition to be included. This requires that the organization has already acquired significant coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources. We are not interested in what an organization wishes to say about itself. We are interested in what third-party writers - who have no personal, political or financial interest in the topic - have chosen on their own to write about it. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:Mehrdad Biazarikari

Hello Drm310, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:Mehrdad Biazarikari, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Greetings Drm310, I have noticed that your signature contains an image in it which does not follow the guidelines of WP:SIGIMAGE. Thank you. -- Grapefanatic (talk) 13:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Grapefanatic: The maple leaf in my signature is an emoji and not considered an image. Use of emojis has been allowed per multiple discussions in the archives of Wikipedia talk:Signatures. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you for telling me. -- Grapefanatic (talk) 14:06, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: User:Chirag kheni

Hello Drm310. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Chirag kheni, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a webhost. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Iconic Bassist Extrodinair...The New Era of Live Music" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Iconic Bassist Extrodinair...The New Era of Live Music has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 18 § Iconic Bassist Extrodinair...The New Era of Live Music until a consensus is reached. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: User:3sgf/sandbox

Hello Drm310, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:3sgf/sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:13, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CjThaStray

User is in fact an indigenous music artist trying to give reference in web search. Cj Tha Stray (talk) 20:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As it is important this remains existing for future generations within the Australian indigenous community. Cj Tha Stray (talk) 20:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not 100% with the process of uploading an artist information and am slowly getting to the references of my work.

Although if you would like to help then please research my work online and then formulate and objective to contribute. Cj Tha Stray (talk) 21:04, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CjThaStray: You cannot use Wikipedia to promote yourself or your work; this is an inherent conflict of interest. We have no interest in what a person wants to say about themselves. Only persons who meet Wikipedia's notability requirements are worthy of inclusion, and a person is not capable of being an objective judge of their own notability.

Promotion has a broad definition on Wikipedia. It doesn't mean just advertising something or someone for commercial gain; it also means attempts to "create awareness" for a person, group or cause. Wikipedia is not a place to tell the world about a worthy cause or right historical wrongs.

Wikipedia articles are about topics that have already acquired significant coverage from a variety of reliable and independent sources. The content of articles consists of paraphrased summaries of material previously published in the aforementioned reliable sources. They are written in a plainly factual, emotionless and neutral point of view. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

The Helping Hand Barnstar given to me by Ponyo (talk) on 16:15, 23 March 2023 (UTC) has been moved to my user page. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock requests

It's not much use trying to tell unblock requesters that the colons and such screw up the formatting; our own automatic reply mechanism is, I think, where those colons as well as the double signatures are coming from. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:40, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol \| May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why

Why do you want my page down? There is nothing wrong with it DinnoSteelerss (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect. Publicizing your team's existence to the world is promotion and not allowed. Unless your team is notable according to Wikipedia's definition, then it's not worthy of inclusion. And even if it is, someone connected to the team should not be the one to write about it. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:08, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion concern

Subject: Seeking Clarification on Profile Deletion and Requesting Assistance

Dear Drm310,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to seek clarification on the deletion of my user profile page and to request your guidance on how to properly create a profile that adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines.

I understand that my profile may have appeared too similar to a CV, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. However, I noticed that your user profile contains a considerable amount of personal information, which seems to align with the reasons my profile was deleted. My intention was to maintain a professional tone by including a brief bio. This I got from your profile which seems like a CV, violating the principles of the profile. Can you comment and maybe when I help what does it mean that looks like a CV: | occupation = Programmer | employer = | education = Bachelor of Engineering | university = University of Saskatchewan | hobbies = Gardening, Local history, Photography | religion = Atheist | politics = Social democrat

I also see that it explicitly says that is flexible, so I imagine the titles should not be a problem, so I do not have to follow exactly the headline, is that right?

Could you please provide specific feedback on which aspects of my profile were problematic? This will help me understand how to proceed and create a compliant user page. I am eager to contribute to Wikipedia by updating and writing articles, but as a newcomer, I would appreciate clear guidance on the process.

In the future, it would be helpful if, instead of outright deletion, the original page could be preserved with suggestions for improvement. This would allow users like myself to learn from the experience and make the necessary updates more efficiently.

I look forward to your response and appreciate any advice you can provide on how to proceed. Thank you for your time and attention.

Sincerely,

Corzogac Corzogac 15:23, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Corzogac. Although I did nominate your userpage for deletion, it was another user with admin privileges (Explicit) who deleted it. I cannot read deleted content, so I do not remember the exact details of what your userpage contained. However, I must have felt like it seemed too much like self-promotion or resumé-like material.

While it is fine to mention one's education and professional experience, the key is brevity. I use the template called {{Infobox user}} as a way to condense this down to the bare minimum. One's accolades and achievements in life do not build or enhance your reputation as a Wikipedia user, so "talking up" these things can often come across as self-promotional. Everyone is considered equal here, regardless of their education or life experience.

I see that you have decided to recreate your userpage after it was deleted. While I would have preferred that you wait until I had a chance to reply to your inquiry, this version of your userpage looks acceptable now. I would add the template {{userpage}} to the top, as this will clearly demonstrate that you are aware that it is a userpage and not an attempt at an autobiography.

The last thing I will mention is if you edit a topic where you have a close personal or professional connection, then you should disclose this as a conflict of interest. If you edit a topic where you have a financial interest (for example, your employer or a client), then the much stricter and mandatory paid editing disclosure policy applies. These disclosures should be made on your userpage as well, where they are clearly visible. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I understand now more.

I will add the {{userpage}} on the top. Also later I might add the {{infobox user}}, which I see like the space you use for providing details of the person.

Regards Corzogac 17:06, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Garrett Camp

Hi. I work for Garrett Camp. The current page is promotional and relies almost exclusively on press releases, guest blogs, short blurbs, and brief mentions in passing. In compliance with WP:COI, I disclosed my connection to Mr. Camp and shared a draft rewrite on the Talk page that is a more proper biography summarizing independent sources.

You gave me a welcome message on my Talk page that said that I could ask you to look at a draft I'd like to propose, so I was hoping you might be willing to take a look. Generally, the proposed draft is substantially less promotional and better cited than the current page. However, the draft would make some neutrality balances to criticisms about an expensive house he bought in the "Wealth" section. John Pinette (talk) 15:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@John Pinette: Thank you for reaching out, and also for making the proper disclosures. I will have a look at your proposed rewrite and provide some feedback. It might take me a few days, but I will get to it when time permits. I will be in touch. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. 171.101.104.244 (talk) 00:50, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drm310. I wanted to follow up regarding the proposed draft I shared for the Garrett Camp page. You suggested a month ago that it might take some time to review.

@Tristario: already addressed the BLP issues. I just wanted to see if reviewing the rest of the draft was still on your radar. I don't anticipate my COI being all that controversial for the rest of it, now that the BLP issues are addressed, but still want to follow protocol. Thanks John Pinette (talk) 17:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drm310. In May you said you would review the proposed draft I had put together on the Garrett Camp page pursuant to WP:COI. Over the last few months, editors have reached a consensus on the BLP issues on the page, but no one has reviewed the draft that contains the other 95% of the improvements I was hoping to make, to reduce promotion and expand on encyclopedic content. I know it's been some months, but I wanted to circle back to see if you still had any interest in reviewing the draft. Let me know if you prefer I annotate it, or do one section at-a-time - whatever makes it easier to review. Thanks. John Pinette (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@John Pinette: Sorry for my absence, I have had work pressures and a death in the family taking most of my time in recent months. You might want to enlist someone else's help if you need some quicker feedback. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SPI Clerking

Hi. I saw that you added your name to the volunteer list, then took it off due to a lack of response. I'm sorry that nobody got back to you quickly, but the SPI clerk application process moves slowly. My suggestion is to keep your name on the list and be patient. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:03, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: Thanks, I will consider it... although I see another applicant hasn't gotten a response since November 2022. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I feel your pain. It's a long-term problem, and one that I'm not happy about. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:28, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let me echo RoySmith's point above. Although I'm not an SPI clerk or a functionary, from observing the history of that page (and some experience from my failed request) SPI clerks requests can take a very long time. Take the latest addition to the team, for example: their name was added to the list way back in June 2022, and appointed about a year later. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:28, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks RoySmith and 0xDeadbeef - I've decided to re-add myself. Hopefully I'll still have the time and interest when my application is reviewed. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My Page Update

DrEricss (talk) 05:14, 8 June 2023 (UTC) Dear thank you for the feedback, let me think around it and get back with a better version of that article. appreciated your help.[reply]

@DrEricss: Please be aware that a company is not entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists. All topics must be notable by Wikipedia's definition to merit inclusion. In the specific case of a company, it must meet the notability criteria for companies and organizations. For this to happen, the company must have already received significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources.

Please use the WP:Article wizard to create a draft article that can be reviewed by other uninvolved editors prior to publication. Reviewers will check for various requirements to ensure that it is acceptable (notability, proper use of citations to reliable sources, formal tone and neutral point of view). If the reviewer declines your draft, they will tell you why, and what it needs to be accepted if you re-submit it for review. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Publsihed Trainocate Group article. How long does it take to get approved and see on Wikipedia search?

Publsihed Trainocate Group article. How long does it take to get approved and see on Wikipedia search? Masnaida (talk) 08:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Masnaida Since you are addressing a specific user, the help me tags are unnecessary. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As both 331dot and I have pointed out, you have a matter of higher priority to resolve first. You have a mandatory obligation to clearly and visibly disclose your employment with this company. The preferred way to this is with the {{paid}} template on your userpage (User:Masnaida). Your employment is, by itself, sufficient for you to be considered a paid editor.

You've made two copies of this article: Draft:Trainocate Group and User:Masnaida/sandbox. I would concentrate your efforts on Draft:Trainocate Group, since that is the preferred space to create draft articles. It must be submitted for review by clicking the "Submit the draft for review!" button in the article header. This will add it to the queue of drafts for review. Please note that this process is backlogged, and can take several weeks for a review to be done. Since there is no deadline and all Wikipedia users are volunteers who edit in their spare time, you will simply have to wait your turn.

As 331dot also mentioned, a company is not entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists. All topics must be notable by Wikipedia's definition to merit inclusion. In the specific case of a company, it must meet the notability criteria for companies and organizations. This requires that the company has already received significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources. I can already tell that the draft reviewers will have issues with some of your sources: CNET (unreliable per this dicussion), trade publications (often promotional in nature due to their target audience) and Trainocate's own website (both a primary and self-published source). Your method of citing sources is also non-standard; please review WP:Citing sources and Help:Footnotes for the standardized way of embedding sources in your article. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello Drm310,

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New pages patrol needs your help!

Hello Drm310,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jason "The Michigan Kid" Lynch

I am so new at this stuff. One of my friends has tried adding me to my hometown's wikipedia page because he seems to think I am worthy. I decided to see if I could meet the guidlines for my own wikipedia page since no one was jumping up to create it for me. I am #2 in the World in Artistic Pool and I have the criteria to match (the World Pool Association is the governing body and I serve on the board of directors) There is a bunch of info out there. I am hoping the draft I created doesnt get shot down or if it does it is detrimental to me becoming part of the wikipedia subjects. Michiganpool (talk) 23:11, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michiganpool: I presume that from what you said, you are Jason Lynch himself? If so, then you should not be writing about yourself, for reasons explained at Wikipedia is not about you and Wikipedia:Autobiography. Your friends should also not be writing about you; writing about topics where one has a close personal or professional connection is called a conflict of interest (COI).

While not prohibited outright, COI editing is inherently perilous. It is rightly presumed that an editor with a COI will find it difficult to write from the required neutral point of view; submit content that is sourced only from reliable and independent sources; and avoid using unpublished personal knowledge or experience. Neither you nor your friends are objective judges of your notability.

There are many reasons to not want a Wikipedia article; the most important of which is that you would never have any right of ownership or control over its contents. The neutral point of view policy ensures that both positive and negative information about a topic is fair game, as long as it is reliably sourced, neutrally worded and presented with proper balance. We refer to this as the law of unintended consequences.

I will trust the judgement of the uninvolved editors who will evaluate the draft article to determine if you meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable person. Don't take it personally if it is declined, but also be prepared for what may ensue if it's accepted. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 00:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As an uninvolved editor I have reviewed this at AFC. I find there is insufficient and inappropriate referencing to provide WP:V,and have pushed it back to Michiganpool for further work, if they so desire. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Bobasso

Please, I need your help. There is an editor who has emotional problems (and this is clearly demonstrated on his own page, where he talks about having a lot of stress and wanting to get away from Wikipedia).

My only intention is to use my energy to create articles that are as perfect as possible. I have been on Wikipedia for several years, and as you can see on my page, I have never had a conflict with anyone like I am having now with this editor (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:JalenFolf)...

First was about the famous Argentine actor Jorge Perez Evelyn (that's his name), who is a third-generation artist; his mother and grandmother were very famous artists in the last century. This editor changed the actor’s name and I complained to him, (he returned it to how it had to be (but he didn't like it at all).

My friend Alfredo Maraw, also a Wikipedia editor, created the article about Jorge's mother (Hilda Dehil) and his grandmother (Anita Bobasso). Since then, it has been a nightmare with the same editor (who is obviously very young) and who did not stop to observe that these people are over 100 years old! The grandmother from 19th century, back then we did not have the press that there is now! Even so, Alfredo got links from the archives of the newspapers, where there are dozens of articles talking about Anita, who also at the end of her life, she made movies.

Regarding Hilda Dehil (Jorge's mother), she was born in 1917, and there were similar problems that were also solved with verifications of links to archives of newspapers and magazines.

My opinion is that the articles by both Anita Bobasso and Hilda Dehil are very good, as they have been appreciated by other editors.

But again, this editor requests "deletion" for Anita Bobasso's article. Because all people there were asking to KEEP IT, he got very angry (again), and noted in the deletion page:

Stop accusing me of WP:IDONTLIKEIT and stop WP:HOUNDing me! I am extremely upset over you and your comrades making ridiculous WP:ASPERSIONS against me in response to this AfD. Jalen Folf (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No happy at all with that, now he is saying that Alfredo Maraw (my friend, who is a journalist and writer), myself, and others are puppets?

Please, this is a painful and unnecessary waste of time that we should use to do good articles in the encyclopedia and not fight among ourselves. Please visit the page of (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:JalenFolf) to see for yourself how controversial it is.

I had the intention of calming the situation, even apologizing, but nothing happened. I would infinitely appreciate your collaboration to end this situation. This editor suffers from stress and obviously wants everyone else to suffer too. Anita Bobasso's article should remain in the encyclopedia out of respect for an Argentine tango star and also because she is not alive to defend herself. Thank you very much in advance, I truly need your help. I am 71 years old and I want peace only. thanks

Ragazzodeitalia (talk) 22:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Drm310,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Drm310:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1100 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Drm310,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipidia Article Deletion

My article has been ammended hope is not conflicting any compliance Salami Abiodun Consult (talk) 21:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Salami Abiodun Consult (talk page watcher)You are using Wikipedia to attempt to advertise yourself. The piece is flagged (again) for deletion. You have not presented yourself as qualifying in any manner for a Wikipedia article. I suggest firmly that you cease from this activity and use LinkedIn instead. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DCLawwyer

Sockpuppet of @DCLawyer and other users. Recently edited Maria Theresia von Paradis Ravpapa (talk) 05:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravpapa: I’m not an admin, so I don’t know what you expect me to do about it. If you have evidence that this account is a sockpuppet, then open a report at WP:SPI. I’m currently on vacation, so my ability to assist you is severely limited. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Socking report

Hi. That first sock doesn't actually exist. She created it from the other sock account, which I've blocked, just in case. I'll take another look at the main one. Deb (talk) 07:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

YHL-Marketing and Carlo Hemmer

Hey! Just FYI, since YHL-Marketing was given a soft block for their username, they are not only allowed but encouraged to create another account, like Carlo Hemmer, and as such they probably shouldn't be given a sockpuppetry warning. Directly from the block notice on their talk page: Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change to this account. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 13:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bsoyka: Right, I had not realized that and so I was just asking the blocking admin Oshwah to clarify that. In that case, the unblock request on the YHL-Marketing should be declined. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:34, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree, it should be declined. I've also tried to clarify the situation with the user. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 13:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bsoyka - Correct. These types of blocks do not autoblock the IP address, allowing the user to either create a new account, or (if they wish) request a username change of their current account. Let me know if you have any questions. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

New pages patrol \| September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Drm310

Quick to recognise and guide a new user

Thank you Bagstobones (talk) 14:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Africa (Weezer cover) for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

(CC) Tbhotch^™ 16:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bernadette Thompson article

Thank you for your attention to the article and your commitment to maintaining the quality of Wikipedia's content! I appreciate your efforts in ensuring that biographies of living persons are accurately and neutrally presented.

Regarding the concerns about unsourced or poorly sourced content, I wanted to highlight that all information and claims within the article are directly supported by content from cited sources, either inline or at the end of each paragraph. I don't believe any information stated is outside the scope of the sources cited. Additionally, all sources are independent and not authored by the subject herself. If there are specific instances where you believe information is not properly sourced, could you please point them out? This will allow us to address any issues promptly.

As for the neutrality of the article, while the tone is generally positive, it reflects the content and perspectives of the reliable third-party sources cited. The articles and references acknowledge the artist's achievements, and there appear to be no available sources that present an alternative viewpoint. It is common for notable artists to receive recognition through praise or controversy, and in this case, the positive tone stems from documented accomplishments rather than personal opinion. If you could point out any specific examples of content that is framed inconsistently with the sources citing it thus resulting in it being non-neutral, this would be appreciated for addressing the issue.

I am committed to ensuring the article adheres to Wikipedia's standards for neutrality and verifiability. If you have specific suggestions or examples where the neutrality could be improved, it would be great to know specifics in order to improve the quality of the article.

Thank you again for your constructive feedback! Fashionista345 (talk) 15:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fashionista345: Articles that are biographies of living persons (BLPs) require the strictest adherence to the policies of verifiability, neutrality and no original research. There are some issues with some of the references you have used, which I will explain. I will preface this by saying that I have not yet gone through each one extensively, as there are a lot.

The following references are interviews with Thompson or use mainly direct quotations from her. These are therefore considered primary sources; BLPs should rely as little as possible on primary sources, and should be used only to augment references from third-party sources:

The following references do not contain significant coverage of Thompson, but only brief mentions of her:

The following reference is a trade publication. These typically contain promotional content centered on the industry in question with little, if any, general-audience content.

https://www.nailpro.com/news/article/21158252/iconic-money-nails-now-exhibiting-at-museum-of-modern-art-in-new-york

The following references I could not access:

https://editionml.com/International ("EDITION is not available to international users at this time.")

The next set of references is less problematic, but they do go against readers' default expectations that sources are freely accessible.The following references are either behind a paywall or require registration to view, making them more difficult to verify:

The following references are just republished copies of the above Washington Post article. You should consider choosing just one of these copies and then use the syntax to reuse the source more than once:

As far as the concerns over non-neutral tone, these are some examples:

".. known for her innovative designs ..." - "innovative" is considered a "peacock word"
"Her work has influenced both street style and high fashion, playing a role in bringing creative nail art into mainstream acceptance." - according to who?
The "Legacy" section repeats these statements and uses sources which I have mentioned as problematic.

Even if the sources themselves have a subjective tone, it is up to Wikipedia editors to strip out any language that conveys feeling. Our job is to give the readers the plain, emotionless facts about a topic, and allow them to decide how they feel about it.

I've noticed as well that a number of statements in the article suffer from citation overkill. It is better to cite one good source than a collection of mediocre or subpar ones.

Despite all this, I do believe that she does meet Wikipedia's criteria for a notable person and merits inclusion. I believe that the issues I outlined are solvable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:29, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your detailed response! You've made some reasonable points, and I've already started improving the article based on your feedback.

Firstly I do believe the neutrality issue has been effectively addressed in a recent edit to the "Legacy and Public Reception" section. This edit provides context for the tone and language used throughout the article by making specific references to independent sources that frame the subject accordingly, particularly those that offer more reliable and detailed coverage. You mentioned that "innovative" can be a peacock word, and I understand how terms like that, along with "revolutionary," can sometimes be misused as marketing fluff. However, that doesn't mean they're never appropriate. When categorizing an artist's impact in a few key words as a preface or shorthand to more detailed references, "innovative" seems to be a fitting choice here as it isn't used in a generic manner merely to say something positive but rather acknowledges the nuance her contributions had on the culture.

The other points you raised about the subject's impact and influence—such as converging hip hop and fashion, and bridging niche and mainstream—are also clarified in a more verifiable way through quotes and explicit paraphrasing from reliable sources in that section. Since artistic achievements are quite subjective without official awards, adding quotes and paraphrases provides vital context to the reader and substantiates the point of view being presented.

Do you see what I mean?

In considering the issues with the sources you mentioned, I've removed the republished articles and retained the original. Also, while the Washington Post is typically paywalled, this article in particular appears to be freely accessible.

As for the articles that are interviews, I understand your concerns to some extent. However, I wouldn't categorize them strictly as primary sources. The outlets are reputable, and while they publish direct quotes from the subject, they also bear liability for libel, so there's an element of editorial oversight that we can reasonably acknowledge—unlike a personal blog by the subject. I believe the stories and main ideas from these articles are also captured by other more reliable, independent sources. While they may include certain specific details, I don't consider any of them contentious; at best, they enhance the article's contextual information for the reader. Perhaps they could be relied upon less, though.

For the Vibe magazine article, you're correct that it's mostly an interview. However, the beginning portion is key because it describes the story from the editor's perspective and includes important information about the work she did with Kim Kardashian and Lady Gaga. Because of that element, I think it has sufficient independence to cite that piece of information.

Concerning the articles you cited as containing "trivial mentions", I don't agree with that characterization. While the coverage may not be extensive, it typically mentions the subject in meaningful contexts related to what she is known for, or within larger discussions about the field or its history, noting her contributions. A trivial mention would be something with a degree of irrelevance—like "the subject was at a party having a good time high-fiving a celebrity." In the guidelines example for trivial mentions, it states that if a president were mentioned in an article briefly for being in a high school marching band, that would be trivial. I don't believe the same principle applies if a president were mentioned in a single sentence within a substantive discussion about presidential qualities, where the sentence declares that president to have that quality, even if they're not mentioned again. In such a case, citing that sentence would be acceptable because it is substantive and meaningful, not trivial or irrelevant.

I do think that the citations in the Career section could still be cleaned up a bit as you say, including relying less on some of the interview articles in certain areas, including some quotes or paraphrasings to make certain claims more easily verifiable and accessible, and maybe removing some redundant citations. However, citation overkilll is not actually a policy or even a guideline for that matter, it's just an essay describing some editors' preference / disdain for having a certain amount of citations present consecutively, so simply having that present doesn't by itself warrant a call-to-action to correct it.

Again, I appreciate your detailed response and am curious to know what you think of my recent edits and points raised here, thank you! Fashionista345 (talk) 03:59, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a closer look at the Allure and ElleCanada interview articles. While much of the article is an interview, and may be considered a primary source for content quoted from the subject, there is content included by the writer of the article which wouldn't qualify as a primary source when cited. Some of the citations using these sources rely on things stated by the writer directly like the subject's background and whom the subject collaborated with. With that in mind, the articles do have a place as a secondary source but I think you are correct that care should be taken to ensure certain claims aren't solely supported by quotes directly from the subject. I'm looking through to see any examples of that to change. Fashionista345 (talk) 16:54, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I went through the article again and replaced citations that were relying on reference to primary source quotes with secondary source content and removed it from places where it was redundant and already supported by secondary sources. I believe the content's verifiability should now be more reasonably accessible and consistent with secondary sources. Fashionista345 (talk) 17:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fashionista345: I think you've done a good job of satisfying most of my concerns about the article, so I'm going to call this a successful conclusion. As Cabayi mentioned, it was a minor breach of etiquette for you, as a new user, to move your article back into the mainspace from the draft space. However, there's no need to belabour the point if it was evaluated as C-class and mainspace-ready.

Have you edited Wikipedia in the past? You appear to be very familiar with the syntax and terminology used here. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:39, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t been an official Wikipedia editor before, but I’ve been an avid reader of it for years. I also do quite a bit writing in my life so it's been pretty easy for me to pick up on the style and formatting used here. 😊

I always wanted to contribute, but when I first looked into it I saw that Wikipedia has soooo many rules and procedures to keep track of. It's pretty confusing and I didn't have the time or energy to manage that kind of learning curve. Luckily, I recently came across some AI chatbots that seemed to be trained on materials for editing on Wiki. I haven't used them for writing content but they've been ENORMOUSLY helpful in walking me through what to do as an editor, how to do it and summarizing things to look out for and comply with. It's not perfect but it's made it a million times easier for me to contribute!

If there were an official Wikipedia AI chatbot assistant, I think there would be a lot more editors! Fashionista345 (talk) 05:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The bot may be guiding you in what you can do, but it's lousy in what you should do.

You can skip WP:AFC for an article you've created, but it makes you look like a PAID editor trying to evade scrutiny.
You can remove comments you've added to a talk page (so long as they have not yet received an answer), but it's uncommon behavior. It's definitely not closing a thread, that would be done with {{cot}} & {{cob}} templates.

Starting a new article from scratch is not easy. Taking the time to learn through making small alterations to existing articles is a massive help in getting started, a help that the AIBOT has deprived you of. Cabayi (talk) 13:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bernadette Thompson moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Bernadette Thompson. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because a new user gamed autoconfirmed to promote their userspace draft to mainspace without review. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Cabayi (talk) 11:48, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cabayi: The article creator has already moved it back to the mainspace. Can you please engage with them, as I believe this is a matter for an administrator-level user. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:24, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. In light of Ipigott's review of the article I'm not going to press the point. I'm not overjoyed at a new user moving their own draft into mainspace as Fashionista345 did but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ - Cabayi (talk) 18:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedy deletion: Draft:Sinesipho yoli

Hi, Drm310! I wanted to let you know that I have declined your G11 speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Sinesipho yoli because I did not find it to be unambiguously promotional, especially given that it only included information for an infobox. The page is likely an autobiography that would be deleted under A7 in the main space, but draft articles do not qualify. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Significa liberdade. Jimfbleak deleted it as G2 instead. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Significa liberdade: I just noticed your recent adminship. Congratulations! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Saskatoon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hugh Gordon. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sock notes

Hi there. I appreciate you trying to help by leaving sock notes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darius J. Pearce. Unfortunately, those notes aren't working well because they link to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DariusJersey which never happened. The sock discovery happened at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#DariusJersey and RichardColgate where an admin did a check user. It's a bit of a different process that what is normal with WP:SOCKPUPPETRY. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:08, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]