Jump to content

User talk:Acebulf/Archives/Page1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the archive from 2015 moving forwards.



January 2015

[edit]
Comments left by 99.225.204.253 regarding these reverts [1] [2]. See also User talk:99.225.204.253
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Censoring people on behalf of racist genocidal terrorists is as about as low as one can sink

[edit]

I'm curious as to why you are apologizing for a lunatic's racist open plan to exterminate the German race? Please explain to me why you agree with this completely insane "jew" Kaufmann's inhuman rantings that my grandfather should have been sterilized, my father never born, me or my brother never born.

Extra points if you can do it while still trying to pretend that advocating the genocide of an entire race is not racist.

PS if you're amateur and delusional enough to reference "the holocaust" (™) , please tell me how the 100,000,000 Christians genocided in the Soviet Union by insane racists like "Kaufman" who are never mentioned or remembered are "less worthy" of remembering than the "6 million" number you can be thrown into prison for asking to see any factual proof of.

Once again you censor what you cannot address because you have nothing factual to say

[edit]

Thank you for proving beyond any doubt you have no credibility or integrity whatsoever, and if you're not a paid shill you are far too stupid to be here if this site is to pretend to have anything other than lies.

I'm still waiting for you to explain to me why you are endorsing and apologizing for an insane racist who wanted to exterminate all Germans.

Worthless cowardly racist piece of shit. Kill yourself and you might salvage some respect, pathetic scum.

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the curant Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity

[edit]

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Time to stop!!!

[edit]

YOU'RE A PUSSY. I know who you are, richard. Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!!Time to stop!!! 2A02:C7D:7670:5600:DBC:42E:3383:6129 (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My name ain't Richard, yo. Acebulf (talk) 21:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Acebulf. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


upper caste

[edit]

In India upper caste are among general obc category at todays date. They have huge criminal activities described by NCRB. Brahmins are considered superior among themselves. It's correct know you are helping them acebulf and its wrong.today's India total property occupations government are well occupied by them and their crimes have got no justice in India. Abhinav686 (talk) 03:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment regarding a revert

[edit]

Dear Acebulf I respect you telling me you reverted my piece but I DO NOT how my piece wasn't constructive. By the way that article earlier was copied word from word from another website I have already viewed so if you don't change back the piece that I put in I will not only add my revertment back in but change some of the piece too . because there wasn't even a reference to the website I viewed there was another website. By the way my name means nothing so if that is why you took my revertments out that is silly, honesty my name means nothing Kind Regards Be_nice_Be_awkward — Preceding unsigned comment added by Be nice Be awkward (talkcontribs) 03:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You da best Acebulf

[edit]

Talkback

[edit]

See Talk:List of Other Backward Classes in Sikhism#Hmm...~ Winged BladesGodric 14:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Information

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

Please carefully read this information:

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

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

...SerialNumber54129...speculates 14:34, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It makes me sad that the assumption of good faith has been removed from a certain class of articles. It seems to go against what I believed Wikipedia to be. Acebulf (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you are classifying perfectly-valid edits as blanking, in a highly volatile editing-area, how do you assume that you be greeted with a bouquet of good-faith?! Anyways, if I seemed unnecessarily aggressive or terse over the entire issue, I apologize for the same. ~ Winged BladesGodric 16:21, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Winged Blades of Godric: It was more that I was unaware that there was discretionary sanctions, or that the issue was controversial at all. On reading the discretionary sanctions it seems like this has been a very controversial issue for a long time and I now understand why blanking was necessary in such a case. I had just never seen a proper use of blanking before (ie. outside of vandalism), so it was very strange and I reacted too aggressively (disregarding AGF and such). I apologize for that. Also, just to note, it wasn't your behavior in particular that seemed terse or anything, but the whole situation, especially with the other AFD, and that I genuinely didn't know of the history of the issue so it was a bit like walking into a hornet's nest. Acebulf (talk) 17:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I sincerely appreciate your reply.The topic is probably one of the most volatile zones, in the sense that it is governed by both ACDS and Community Sanctions.Anyways, you are invited to edit in the area but after getting a bit familiar with the very stringent requirements of sourcing etc.Regards:)~ Winged BladesGodric 17:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

[edit]

Dear Acebulf, thank you for your comments on the proposed Vesco Wikipedia page. Let me try and answer them, hopefully to your satisfaction. The book was published almost 50 years ago so digging up files now is not always easy. I have a Pdf copy of the review by John Berry, Business Week's general news editor at the time. I don't know if that is helpful to you. If yes I can email it to you. The John Kenneth Galbraith review in New York magazine I thought was extremely relevant. In it he says:"The story of Vesco has now been written by Robert A. Hutchison (Vesco, Praeger). It is good. One is braced for a rush job: Hutchison has been painstaking in his research. He also writes well with just the right note of contempt for all concerned.… Hutchison is an honest man. He knows that Vesco is a lousy character with lousy friends – a child of his particular time. He does not try to make him otherwise…" I also have a copy of a letter Galbraith wrote to Mrs Miriam Klipper, Praeger's editor on the book, in which he states: "I have just finished reading the Vesco volume by Hutchison. It is altogether an excellent job, a marvellously thorough piece of research, well-written and, with all else, a truly horrifying story. I would happily give you a much merited word of praise. However, I've been sufficiently impressed by the book that I've asked Clay Felker if I could have a page to review it in New York magazine, and he has agreed…" I can also email you a copy of Galbraith's letter if required. I would like to add that Amazon in its page about the book includes two customer reviews which I found encouraging. One is headed: "A must read for fans of who's who in White Collar crime." The other is headed: "Still timely nearly forty years later." Both I found reassuring comment of the books ongoing relevance. If you have other questions and/or reservations, please do not hesitate. Regards, Robert Roberthutch (talk) 14:39, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar
for creating the MV Butiraoi article, which falls within an underrepresented area of Wikipedia. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 14:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Big thanks @Xwejnusgozo:! Acebulf (talk) 21:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 1900 English beer poisoning

[edit]

On 21 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1900 English beer poisoning, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1900 English beer poisoning, in which more than 6,000 drinkers were poisoned by arsenic, was misdiagnosed for months as alcoholic neuritis? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1900 English beer poisoning. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1900 English beer poisoning), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add the bot to the main page

[edit]

Add the bot to your user page please. AcebulfBOT (talk) 02:02, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I need confirmation by an edit from this account that confirms the account above as theirs - it's bot blocked until I receive one (just in case). ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:06, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah: This was a comment to myself because new user accounts cannot edit other account's userpages. :P Acebulf (talk) 02:15, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's good enough for me. Thanks ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:17, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to check for copyvio

[edit]

Hi Acebulf and thanks for your work reviewing new drafts. Please remember to check for copyright violations. The particular one I saw was Draft:Profesorul biolog George D. Vasiliu, which was copied from here. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{ping|Diannaa} Thanks for the heads up. I forgot to do it as the article was written in another language and I had inverted the workflow. I'll be sure to check even quickfailed articles for copyvio. Acebulf (talk) 18:02, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ferdie le Grange

[edit]

Good day Acebulf

Thanks for accepting my article on Ferdie le Grange

User:Barry Ne

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thank you Barry Ne (talk) 08:37, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer Flag

[edit]

Hi, Acebulf/Archives.
I've noticed that you are an AfC reviewer but don't yet have the New Page Reviewer flag. Would you please consider heading over to PERM and requesting it? (check the flag requirements HERE)
As part of a larger plan to increase cooperation between New Page Patrol and Articles for creation, we are trying to get as many of the active AfC reviewers as possible under the NPR user flag (per this discussion). Unlike the AfC request list, the NPR flag carries no obligation to review new articles, so I'm not asking you to help out at New Page Patrol if you don't want to, just to request the flag. Of course, if it is something you would be interested in, you can have a look at the NPP tutorial. Please mention that you are an active AfC reviewer in your application.
Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 06:10, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

[edit]

Hello Acebulf. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia; if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of MV Butiraoi

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of MV Butiraoi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:36, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AGJA article

[edit]

Dear Acebulf, could you please be more specific when you say that our article contains copyright content? Which paragraphs are you referring to? Thanks Elise.carreau (talk) 15:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AGJA article

[edit]

Thanks for your feedback. I see that the Kilimanjaro principles that were listed were deleted and that readers can access them through the link. I have resubmitted the article for review.Elise.carreau (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject Portals

[edit]

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1989 Chinese Protests by Region Citations

[edit]

Hi Acebulf,

Do what every you feel you need to on the article to make it as good as possible. (Still new to messaging on Wiki, didn't know if you'd get a notification on the Talk part of the Protests page).

Cheers, Honeyhistory — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honeyhistory (talkcontribs) 06:32, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for MV Butiraoi

[edit]

On 24 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article MV Butiraoi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an overloaded Kiribati ferry, said to be carrying 88 passengers and 35 tonnes of coconuts, broke in half and sank last January? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/MV Butiraoi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, MV Butiraoi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:01, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Opémiska Community Hall fire

[edit]

On 14 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Opémiska Community Hall fire, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the Opémiska Community Hall fire broke out, people inside did not immediately evacuate because they thought the fire was part of a performance? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Opémiska Community Hall fire. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Opémiska Community Hall fire), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

[edit]
Hello Acebulf/Archives, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

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

Deletion tags

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

Backlog drive:

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

Editathons

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

Paid editing - new policy

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

Subject-specific notability guidelines

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

Not English

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

News

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

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much

[edit]

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   22:46, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives, 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)[reply]

ITN recognition for Corinne Gallant

[edit]

On 26 July 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Corinne Gallant, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 06:51, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for promoting this article! I wrote (or translated/expanded) it last November for the WIR The World Contest. I'm leading another editing drive now and have never been very fast with recent events, so I very much appreciate your attention to it. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:35, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

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

Hello Acebulf/Archives, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

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

New technology, new rules
  • New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
  • Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
  • Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.
Editathons
  • Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
The Signpost
  • The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

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

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives, 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) [reply]

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

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

Hello Acebulf/Archives, 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)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

[edit]

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

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
  • Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.
If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.
We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.
With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Acebulf. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

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

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

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

Great editing, you deserve a trout!

[edit]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

This is the thing.

[edit]

You will probably need to request semi protected on the U20 Men's, U16 Men's, The U19 Women's, U17 Women's, The National Futsal Team,.... and so on because that how it's gonna be, that's how im gonna do it. Got it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.97.246.210 (talk) 03:50, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

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)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:AD

[edit]

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 22:55, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.17

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

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)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.18

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

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)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

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

QUALITY of REVIEWING

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

Backlog

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

Move to draft

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

Notifying users

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

PERM

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

Other news

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

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


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

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

Ban this IP

[edit]

Hello, this IP has been used to edit articles on wikipedia without my consent. I dont plan on editing or creating articles in the future, so if its possible please remove all of this ip's edits from now on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.171.160 (talk) 01:32, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

Backlog

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

Coordinator

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

This month's refresher course

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

Deletion tags

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

Paid editing

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

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
  • Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.
Not English
  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
Tools

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

[edit]

Hello Acebulf/Archives,

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

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 808 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

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

This month's refresher course

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

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

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

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

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

Community Wish list

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


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

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

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I'm posting this question right. Thanks for your review!

The source we have for much of the info about Fairview is from a historian who visited the house in the 1990s for the purpose documenting it's history. This report was provided to us in hard copy by the previous owner who we bought the home from. It seems credible to us and has been confirmed by many locals. However, as you point out, we don't have any published sources.

I do have the following sources: 1. info about "Westwood" was published in the book Uncommon Vernacular. 2. I found a newspaper from 1865 archived online that mentions the house.

What is your advice? Thank you.