User talk:Bri/Archive 15

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Kenneth Saclote

I'm starting to just lose hope that admins will ever do something about this user. I reported him the first time and the report went unanswered until a bot archived it, now the second time the report is being ignored again and with the amount of reports that are filed per day I expect this one will have the same faith. I am absolutely exhausted by having to undo this editor's edits all the time, but if admins won't even acknowledge our reports how are we supposed to deal with this? { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 04:12, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Most likely adnin people are involved with the end of year holidays and not so involved with Wikipedia right now. That means only the most urgent problems are getting addressed. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:25, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Bri!

Happy New Year!

Bri,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:14, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Last news story of the year. Happy New Year. [1] . Smallbones_(smalltalk) 01:28, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I go right to the BLP categories (did you know Amandla Stenberg is one of only a handful of Inuit-Americans with WP bios?). But I'm idiosyncratic. Happy new year! ☆ Bri (talk) 03:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflict on Indiabulls

Bri, we had an edit conflict on this article. I think I included all the edits you made when I implemented mine, apologies if I missed something! BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 16:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

COIN

I once more am amazed by your careful and perceptive work. I wish I had time to look in more often (to the extent I still have time for screening I look at newly submitted drafts). But I'm always available for an opinion. DGG ( talk ) 17:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

F International draftified

I have a message that "Bri" has moved this page to draft status - I see queries about the free use of the F International Logo and an indication that additional sources are needed. I need help - can someone please tell me what is going on and how this IMPORTANT historical page can be restored? It is a well-documented and well-sourced (38) article about the software industry and entrepreneurial-ism, drawn from reliable published literature. AndyB (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Six million

• here are my answers to your questions. hope they are acceptable.

I don't know if you remember it, but it looks like you are about to win Wikipedia:Six-million pool. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:58, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

• There's still a chance he might not, if Wikipedia hasn't reached six million before 26 March 2020. JIP | Talk 22:30, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Ok, Bri suggested a brief interview for The Signpost. I don't know exactly where we'll put it, but at least part of it will make it into the next issue.
• Q1: What are you going to do with the $6,000,000 prize? (just kidding!)

I don't know, but if i get in a catastrophic test plane accident and have my legs, one arm, and one eye destroyed, I know what I am doing with $6,000,000. Gentlepersons, they can rebuild me. They have the technology. They have the capability to build the world's first bionic Wikipedian. Mercurywoodrose will be that editor. Better than he was before. Better, stronger, faster, with more reliable sources.

• Q2: Do you remember why you made the December 2019 prediction 6 years ago?

I figured I knew just enough about mathematics to make a somewhat accurate back of the napkin estimate for the date, factoring in a bit of the slowdown in new article creation, and believing that this downward trend in new articles would continue. I'm sure I must have done an actual calculation, but the methods I used would probably give an actual statistician apoplexy. It was a miseducated guess.

• Q3: What's the biggest change you've seen in Wikipedia you've seen in that time (other than a couple of million articles)

A team of editors with way too much time on their hands created an automation system for creating new Portals. What's a Portal, you ask? Exactly... On a side note, the biggest change that did NOT occur is that the Deletionists and the Inclusionists are still engaged in a Manichean struggle, with neither side winning. The proof of this is that the number of articles has not gone to zero, decreased by a factor of Thanos, or expanded to infinity and beyond.

• Q4: How many articles have you created?

310. using created by me, and adding up the total articles by HAND. Computers! Ha! Who needs them! I did get into the top 400 editors by edit count, which of course is a meaningless measure, but it was fun while it lasted.

• Q5: What's your prediction for the 8,000,000th article? (the 7,000,000 pool is closed)

I cannot predict that, its beyond my processing capacity as a quasi-quantum computer, but I know what i would LIKE it to be. An article about ME, of course. Hopefully for something worthwhile, not notorious. First Wikipedian to be shot into the Sun for being too sarcastic? Well, that's sort of both...

• Q6: Is all the effort going into creating all these articles worth it? Shouldn't we be concentrating on quality over quantity by now? (Sorry, if that one is too serious)

I will answer with an entirely unrelated story: Paul Krassner, in his autobiography Confessions of a Raving, Unconfined Nut, wrote about Stewart Brand, Whole Earth Catalog confabulator, "He could be more of a minimalist than Bob Dylan. I told Brand about the time I went to hear Ram Dass speak, and in the audience a heckler shouted out his capsule critique, "Words!" I told Brand I later learned that the heckler had once ***** a goat. Brand scoffed, "Deeds!""

• Q7: What's your favorite article out of the last million created (since November 1, 2015)?

Aside from my own articles created during this time, of which my favorite subject is Jen Bartel (she rocks), I don't know. How about new articles on things i like? My first thought, I really loved Joker. That article was created, oh, wow, on my birthday! I didn't expect that!.

• Q8: Anything else you want to add? Feel free to be serious, philosophical, sentimental, humorous, thank your mother, etc.

I'm a little sad that new editors will be facing an ever more complete work, with fewer areas to expand without being an expert. Perhaps we should consider erasing Wikipedia every few decades, and recreating it from scratch, to give new editors that initial experience of joy and wonder that they can be part of this, not just an observer, by clicking that innocent little "edit" tab. But maybe there is hope, maybe that sense of wonder will persist into the future. I know I fell in love with Wikipedia, and while I'm no longer obsessed with editing, I may fall in love all over again.

Thanks, Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:56, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Bhanumathi Narasimhan

• Q9: I made minor edits on article. Do let me know if it is ok now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vblni (talk • contribs) 09:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Paccar Tower

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

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 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 21:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:Businesspeople from Vancouver, Washington has been nominated for discussion

Category:Businesspeople from Vancouver, Washington, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. pbp 04:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Bellevue 600

I actually started working on a version of Bellevue 600 in my sandbox, but I don't think it meets the notability standard for buildings until it's approved by the city government (under the current plan). Perhaps we should hold off on creating an article until that happens. SounderBruce 03:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

There were stories in many media today including KOMO, PSBJ, GeekWire, and The Seattle Times. Let's give it a day and see if it's in Friday's The Wall Street Journal. Feel free to merge in your draft... ☆ Bri (talk) 04:00, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

My draft is about halfway complete now, so I'll merge it in when you're ready. This project is going to be the first to break Bellevue's plateaued skyline, so it'll be quite exciting to see this go up. SounderBruce 04:43, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Associated Press did a piece called "Amazon plans for 15,000 employees in Bellevue", picked up by many media in the morning editions. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:34, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Please be more careful...

• User:Geo Swan/Biografilm Festival (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

You placed a {{prod}} on Biografilm Festival, asserting "Unreferenced since 2014, no indication of notability".

I requested its userification, and I couldn't help noticing that, just prior to asserting it was unreferenced you removed two inline bare-url references, citing WP:ELPOINTS in doing so. I had never followed that particular shortcut before. Doing so triggered some concerns for me.

First, it seems to me that inline bare-url references are not, strictly speaking, external links. Inline bare-url references do not measure up to our best practices. But don't the appropriate responses include converting them to better references, or tagging the article for someone else to improved the references?

Second, do you really think it seems fair to call for the removal of an article, for being unreferenced, right after removing its references?

Third, do you really think you should assert topics have "no indication of notability" without first complying with WP:BEFORE?

I would be very surprised to find any significant film festivals, that receive a meaningful number of hits to a web search, that really failed to measure up to our inclusion standards.

You might think, "okay, someone else came along and fixed it..." But deletion is not a substitute for article improvement. Restoring a deleted article, and bringing it up to our current standards, is more work than just improving it, or marking it for improvement, in the first place.

Could you please be more careful in future? Geo Swan (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I am generally careful with PRODs which you can confirm by looking at my batting record at User:Bri/PROD. The inline ELs removed were to fanaticaboutfestivals.it and theculturebusiness.it, both listed in the article as collaborators/promoters of the festival (also both registered to the same individual as the festival's website biografilm.it, per WHOIS), and therefore ineligible to be independent reliable sources. No?

Also, the burden shouldn't be on me or any other volunteer to improve this obvious promotion; see WP:BOGO for a deeper discussion. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I am not a mind reader, and I suspect you aren't either. What you saw as the bias of a COI editor may just have been the inexpert wording of someone who learned English as a second language, who was trying to port the Italian version of the article here.

WRT BOGO, I suggest it is important to bear in mind it is just an essay. I have always thought the general principle that we should not generally delete articles on genuinely notable topics, just because we think the current version is badly written, was important. In rare cases it may make sense to give up, even if the underlying topic is notable. I do not agree this was an instance where that extreme measure was in order.

WRT User:Bri/PROD... so, by looking at this list I will see that you carefully comply with BEFORE and other policies prior to placing a PROD? Hmmm. I can't help noticing less than half of the articles you listed there seem to have stayed deleted.

The first topic I looked at, Clean Energy Canada - your deletion rationale was "Insufficient independent references to satisfy WP:NORG." NORG's nutshell says "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." You can't answer that question unless you comply with BEFORE, and take a reasonable look at your own independent web search. My google search seems to show lots of RS references. So, sorry, this prod, at least, does not reassure me that your prod efforts help build the wikipedia. It looks like another instance where your assessment of the underlying topic's notability relied solely on looking at the references the contributors who wrote the existing content had provided, and had not done a meaningful web search of your own. Sorry, I think it suggests that this particular prod impeded building the wikipedia, by not marking content that should have been improved, for improvement, and jumping immediately to deletion.

If the wikipedia were not run by volunteers, if it were run in a hierarchical fashion, the bosses would promote the workers they had the most confidence in to the positions where they would have the most influence. Untrusted junior employees would be given an opportunity to show they were competent in less influential positions. If this were a commercial enterprise, quality control, deciding which articles should be kept or deleted, would be a responsibility of workers who had already shown they had understood the policies by lots of work creating new content.

Here on the actual wikipedia, however, anyone can assign themselves any task. Lots of enthusiastic people, people who consider themselves pretty wise and intelligent, promote themselves right into the most influential ranks of quality control, without actually having the wisdom or general background of knowledge they think they have. It is a problem. It is a problem for multiple reasons.

I joined the wikipedia during its golden age, when there was a better balance between the contributors who create new content - the stuff our readers come here to read, and the quality control volunteers. However, the wikipedia was built by accident, not by design. Its early success was an accident, and it is really struggling now. Some policy changes of over a decade ago changed the balance between the creation of new content and its quality control. These changes made it far easier for quality control volunteers to succeed in getting content deleted. Certain people found this more satisfying than doing the harder work of improving content.

The sad result of this accident was a defection of the contributors who had been enjoying creating new content, or keeping it up to date. When I joined the wikipedia, during its golden age, it was more fun. I felt part of a community of smart, fair, interesting people, who were also interested in content creation. If I worked on an article on a notable topic, and returned to it, months later, I could generally look forward to some other smart, fair interesting person having made a good solid addition of more new content to the article.

Now, when I return to articles, I'll see that there will have been dozen of edits since I last looked at it, but they will all be edits to the article meta-data. Fads come and go in metadata. Some new initiative will sweep through all articles, and then be deprecated, and undone. Sadly, what I will find, is that no one else has done a lick of work to keep the article up to date.

Where did the other contributors who worked on content go? Quality control volunteers started to make their efforts stop being fun, so they left.

You say you know how to assess whether an article's underlying topic is genuinely notable? Then, please, consider doing more work on the desperately important task of keeping the wikipedia content up to date, and doing less work on deleting content that merits improvement, not deletion.

There is an old Monty Python skit, set in a world where everyone is a Superman. The viewer sees bulging muscled Supermen, dressed as Superman confidently striding up and down High Street. Or driving their cars or riding their bicycles, down High Street. Then there is a crisis! One of the Superman's bicycles failed on him, and he is sprawled on the pavement next to his broken bike! A crowd of panicky Supermen gathers around him! None of them know what to do! Then our hero whispers to the camera "This looks like a job for bicycle repair man." He goes into a phone booth and dons the coveralls and cloth cap of a UK working man, and with his toolkit he sits down next to the broken bike. Onlooking Supermen exclaim, in awe, "Why look! It's bicycle repair man!" as he pulls out his tools and goes to work. There is a very brief montage of him spinning things, lubricating, tightening, before he hands the repaired bicycle to the grateful victim to the gasps of awe from the onlooking Supermen.

The reason I told that story is that it shows that the skill that is in the most demand is the one that is the most important. In the skit everyone could be a Superman, but only the one guy could fix a bike, so he was the most important. Here, today, on today's wikipedia, quality control, deletion, is not the most important task. Far from it. I suggest keeping our content up to date should be considered the most important task. Geo Swan (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

• Your rationale for adding a prod to Log_9_Materials was "Fails WP:CORPDEPTH requirements for coverage above and beyond routine funding announcements." Well WP:CORPDEPTH expands to WP:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Significant_coverage. Did you only look at the references in the article, and fail to comply with BEFORE? I see nothing in that section that authorizes quality control volunteers to ignore the RS found in the web search every nominator is supposed to perform, prior to calling for deletion. My reading of that section is that call for nominators to consider ALL the available RS. Geo Swan (talk) 16:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

• If Michael Lockwood (executive) was Director General (DG) of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) then he would be an instance of WP:POLITICIAN, IMO. POLITICIAN is most often used to consider the notability of those elected to legislatures at the Federal or State/Provincial level. It is important to remember that not all countries have elected legislatures. For this reason the POLITICIAN rules should be applied to any significant officeholder at the Federal or State level. Members of the US Cabinet are merely appointed, they don't have to have ever held any elected office. I've read a POTUS appoints individuals to something like 3,000 offices, and I would defend the directors of sub-cabinet agencies, like the FBI or EPA. Lockwood was an office holder at the Federal level, and earned his notability there. Geo Swan (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

This whole thing reads like you think I'm a bad-article "quality control volunteer" 100% of the time and not a content creator. Far from it. Yes, cleaning up dreck is part of my mission here. But so is building thousands of new articles, facilitating editathons for new editors and doing other outreach specifically for minorities, community-building efforts through The Signpost editorship, and last but not least, creation of the only Wikimedia affiliate in the Pacific Northwest. I'm not in a mood nor have the time to debate two or three individual PROD nominations right now.

By the way, the fraction of articles listed in my nomination log that stayed deleted was: 80% for 2017%; 87% for 2018; 83% for 2019. Where the heck did "less than half" come from? ☆ Bri (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Bri,

Source Guide Discussion

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

Redirects

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

Discussions and Resources

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

Refresher

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

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

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

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Notability assertion: Papadakis

Hi Bri -

I am not a frequent editor here, although I would love to learn the interface well enough to contribute more frequently. I see you unpublished the Stephan Papadakis entry. Can you please help me to understand how the subject falls short of the definition of notable?

Here is a small sample of recent coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable and intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/car-technology/a29872490/first-1000-hp-2020-supra-engine/ https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/buying-maintenance/a29402304/2020-toyota-supra-1000-hp-papadakis-parts-assembly/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/enthusiasts/heres-how-3d-printed-car-parts-are-actually-made/ar-BBY2sgP https://www.latimes.com/newsletters/la-me-newsletter-play-next-fast-and-furious-through-the-streets-of-southern-california-20190716-story.html https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/papadakis-1000-hp-toyota-supra-dyno-test/ http://www.superstreetonline.com/event-coverage/1805-petersen-automotive-museum-celebrates-japanese-car-and-tuning-culture/

Sample of Industry media coverage: https://dsportmag.com/the-cars/aem-drag-civic-the-7s-when-where-and-how/ http://www.superstreetonline.com/how-to/engine/1809-inside-papadakis-racings-1000hp-4-cylinder-drift-engine/ https://www.nydailynews.com/autos/2019-toyota-corolla-hatchback-sema-custom-eye-candy-gallery-1.4044182?pmSlide=1.4044189

A full media bio by a popular car culture website here: https://jalopnik.com/how-la-s-underground-street-racing-scene-and-the-fast-a-1825723732

In addition to setting records and earning titles, trophies, and media coverage in the 1990s racing before there were many online hits to be had, he continues to compete as a team owner and builder and has received a number of more recent industry awards, including "SEMA Masters of Motors" as well as "Team owner of the year" by the racing series he campaigns. (This information is found on his own website).

He is also referenced here by other editors: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fast_and_the_Furious https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_D1_Grand_Prix_series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_scene https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenplayswithcars (talk • contribs) 23:27, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Jenplayswithcars, what do you mean "referenced here by other editors"? Isn't that WP:CIRCULAR? ☆ Bri (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Bagdad Junction, Washington for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bagdad Junction, Washington 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/Bagdad Junction, Washington 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. Reywas92^Talk 08:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

In appreciation

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your eagle-eyed good humour. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Bellevue 600

On 1 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bellevue 600, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Amazon plans to build its tallest office tower in the Bellevue suburb of Seattle, Washington? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bellevue 600. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bellevue 600), 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.

--valereee (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost

The latest issue of The Signpost is available. Talkpage stalkers are welcome to read and comment! ☆ Bri (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks from WP:POST

		The Signpost Barnstar
		You should get one of these every month, I just don't want to clutter up your talk page. Smallbones(smalltalk) 19:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus US State maps

Hello! How do you do the maps like COVID-19 Cases by counties of Washington (state).svg? Is it difficult? I just started an article on Maryland and Puerto Rico and think a map may be useful, especially for Maryland (18 confirmed cases, PR still has 0 confirmed). Thanks! TJMSmith (talk) 21:23, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@TJMSmith: Sorry, didn’t see your question. Are you still interested? Another editor started the Washington map but I can go see where it came from and if there is an equivalent for MD and PR. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:21, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Recommend one of the set c:Category:Locator maps of municipalities of Puerto Rico and c:File:County MD.svg. I hate to say it but I’ve been hand editing the SVG file in Notepad. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for Your help and recommendations

Hi Bri thanks for your help and recommendations on my article the green rush. Any suggestions would be appreciated. I have not done an article in many years and am shaking the rust off. Thanks!Jzesbaugh (talk) 22:31, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey there Jzesbaugh, I'm glad to help. I'm a bit overwhelmed right now, as my volunteer duties at The Signpost have priority (after RL work of course), and I'm also helping on the PNW coronavirus page(s).

I'd love to see more people active at the interest group around WP:WikiProject Cannabis. Perhaps you'd want to introduce yourself there? And please consider participating in WP:420. We had a lot of fun last few years and more contributors are welcome. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Bri, count me in. What exactly is WP420?

Forgive my ignorance, still getting used to the syntax and community on this. Its a lot to absorb. My focus is to correct misconceptions and create articles based on actual themes in the industry and use proper terminology. I see so many articles that are incorrect or just promoting conspiracy's in cannabis as facts.

Any other suggestions are welcome. Jzesbaugh (talk) 04:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jzesbaugh: WikiProject Cannabis' 420 Collaboration is an annual campaign to "create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields", including culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics and religion. Campaigns were held in 2017, 2018, and 2019. The 2020 campaign will be held in April.

The project is chiefly an article improvement/creation drive and campaign for people to contribute media (such as photographs). There are lots of ways to become involved. Come check it out – click on WP:420.

You can see some things I worked on during past years projects at User:Bri/Created#April 2017, April 2018, and April 2019 ☆ Bri (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Bri Cool thanks, I've signed up. I think. Look forward to working on the project.Jzesbaugh (talk) 05:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Bri Hey Bri, this individual did what's called a "Drive by Tagging" on my article, I'm not sure I'm handling it properly. I know you are busy, but if you have a moment. Thanks. Jzesbaugh (talk) 04:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

should see

Wikimedia Space on a future announcement on Wikimania re:COVID. All it says is they are considering the situation and *will* make an announcement. I'd guess they will delay for awhile while they decide, but .... I don't know exactly what the scope of your article is, but somewhere in TS we need to print this. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 13:24, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

The physical part of this one is cancelled according to the GLAM list, but not the online portion. There must be several more of this type of thing now. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 14:23, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19 Re:Comment for The Signpost

Hi Bri, Tenryuu here. In regards to the call you put out at the talk page here I would be willing to answer any questions you may have to the best of my ability (as I personally believe the degree to which the pandemic has affected me by is less than some of my acquaintances). I also want to apologise for assuming your gender earlier on today. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Tenryuu, thanks for replying. Let's start with some easy ones and gauge followup. I'll create a subpage for you User:Bri/Tenryuu interview and am inviting Bluerasberry, my co-editor to participate. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Bri, I've answered your first set of questions. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again. I'll wait for Bluerasberry's input before doing anything else right now ☆ Bri (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I saw what you wrote about acting. Can we describe you as a part-time professional or perhaps an amateur actor? ☆ Bri (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Bri: I work as an amateur actor in community theatre. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Just wanted to say thanks for answering the questions; it looks like your input is appearing in a slightly different form at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report ☆ Bri (talk) 18:11, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Bri, it appears several people had the same idea. Hope your assignment goes well. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm honored to see my name under the 'extraordinary contributors' list. I'm curious if you plan on providing brief descriptions of editors' work related to COVID-19. I've seen some of these usernames in my watchlist for their COVID-related edits, but not all. I'll be sure to look at some of their contributions, just to see why they've been added to this list, but consider providing brief summaries of your reasons for their inclusion. @Bluerasberry: Pinging you here as well. Thank you both for covering the pandemic so nicely for The Signpost. PS - I think I posted about this somewhere already, but I was interview about WikiProject COVID-19 by WikiProject Tree of Life. Editors are still drafting here, but once published, you might mention the interview in a subsequent Signpost edition if WikiProject reports are provided. Just thought I'd share since related to much of the current Signpost edition. Stay safe, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The list was based on hard metrics, of course as with all such thing, the development of the metrics process had human decisions. We discussed linking to my list criteria in the article; in the end, the Editor-in-Chief decided not to press for it, and it's up to my discretion. Here are the criteria; would you mind telling me what you think of inclusion? I'd probably have to put in some more work on actually explaining the metrics. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

No worries, not meaning to make more work. I was just curious why these editors were selected, and thought other editors might wonder the same. Thanks for sharing the link to criteria. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:42, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks for picking up the column which I was unable to finish. It's great, better to move. Thanks also for the copyedit, great collaborating as always. Blue Rasberry (talk) 23:29, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Re: COVID-19 and The Signpost

• Bri - Possibly relevant: EMWCon was going to meet in Ohio starting April 1, 2020, but is now all online, because of the virus. That's not focused on en.wp however. -- econterms (talk) 06:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for your tireless efforts keeping the Washington pandemic article updated! Schazjmd (talk) 00:38, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: thanks for noticing! ☆ Bri (talk) 00:58, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

I realized I was getting better updates on the crisis from your edits on my watchlist than by watching the news. Schazjmd (talk) 12:11, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Still here

Just thought I'd say hello and thank you for all your help this issue. I got another email from - you'll never guess who! Smallbones_(smalltalk) 23:23, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

"Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections" too

Thank you, and could please you add this to Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections too? X1\ (talk) 06:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Congrats

		The Signpost Barnstar
		for 4 outstanding articles (did I miss one?) in the March 2020 issue

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 23:52, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! And it's also four by my count. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:29, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

About Sandeep Maheshwari

Actually I am really confused about your deletion request on the title. You have said that his business section should be discarded bu I don't understand your reason. Will you please guide me because I changed it but I think it requires to change again but I don't understand the reason. And also about YT section . Due to the using of social blade? Can you please explain me so that I work according to it. Kashish pall (talk) 05:37, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Have amplified my comment at the AfD. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

lost apples

Thanks for the thanks. I'm tickled that someone read the article. Schazjmd (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: Sure! If you want it to beseen a bit more widely, you are encouraged to add it to the list at the WikiProject United States 50,000 Challenge ☆ Bri (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Of interest

Hi. I note the COIN thread; but of possible interest: WP:ANI#user:Cokestunt. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:50, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Good news at EvergreenHealth

EvergreenHealth CEO, Jeff Tomlin, said on a nationally syndicated radio show that there were zero new COVID admissions overnight, for the first time in seven weeks. Evergreen was the site of the first several U.S. deaths in February and March.

Putting this here for any page watchers who can use it, or just for a piece of good news. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Confirmed that the Kirkland hospital's reported case count was steady at 354 4/15/2020 and 4/16/2020. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:59, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

My mistake

I did the notification for the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard I had to leave my pc for a second. - AH (talk) 23:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

@AttackHelicopter51: I was actually referring to the red text that appears when you are editing the page. There is a WP:OUTING statement there. In a nutshell, you can’t link to editors’ off-wiki pages unless they do it themselves first. Not a big deal because it was removed quickly, but be careful in the future. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:58, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Q42 (Wikidata item) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Q42 (Wikidata item) 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/Q42 (Wikidata item) 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. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

GOCE review of Conway's Game of Life

@Tdslk: Thank you for the comprehensive copyedits! ☆ Bri (talk) 01:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19 in Snohmish Country

Hey i found a Source that in The Snohomish Country in Washington that 1,770 was Recovered and here the Link for a Proof that People recovered in Washington https://www.heraldnet.com/news/virusupdate/

Eric Weinstein Edit Warring

I added a section on the administrator's noticeboard about this. My problem with the section is that it is just odd as it is not explained relative to anything else, what is the point that is being made? That this guy gave a talk that he thought was smart and no one else did and didn't come? I have nothing against including the information if it is notable but said notability needs to be explained. Did this event create a huge backlash against him? Was this talk super widely known before? Was its undue importance to the field widely spread in the popular media before it was debunked by physicists? I could imagine any of these to be true and I would agree that it would then be notable, however if that is the case it needs to be explained. Otherwise it just is embarrassing rather than embarrassing and notable. You need to differentiate between a story like Tom Cruise went to the bathroom in his pants and everyone laughed at him, to Tom Cruise went to the bathroom in his pants and everyone laughed at him which sources relate gave him the initial motivation to become an actor.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I think the advice you got at ANI was correct; it's a content dispute and should be hashed out on the talkpage, not at noticeboards. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I have added a section on said talk page, please engage there or here if you want the section to stay unmodified.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 19:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Plandemic trailer poster.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Dab on Tochigishiro

I see you reverted my edit on Tochigishiro. If a link to a disambiguation page is best (it rarely is) can you add a Hidden text message so one of us that does dabs doesn't attempt it again. Thanks.— Rod ^talk 15:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't have time to fully explain. Will update tonight. Bri.public (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

LWT (journal) deletion

I removed the irrelevant content from LWT (journal) just now. Thank you for your patience. Chris (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Makalapa and USPF

Greetings, is there a source for this edit? I personally am a little doubtful; the article does list this human information elsewhere on the page and most sources just mention Pearl Harbor in general and none that vent specifically. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:03, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

• Morison, S.E. (2001). Breaking the Bismarck's Barrier, 22 July 1942-1 May 1944. History of United States Naval Operations in World War II. University of Illinois Press. ISBN 978-0-252-06997-0.
• Siggia, Tim (1984), "Duty in Hawaii: just another day in paradise", All Hands, no. nos. 804-814, United States Navy Bureau of Naval Personnel, pp. 18–29, retrieved 2020-05-22 {{citation}}: |issue= has extra text (help)
• Sanburn, Curt (December 2008), "Inside Fortress O'ahu", Hana Hou!, vol. 11, no. 6, Hawaiian Airlines

A web search for "Makalapa crater" is fruitful. Here's a start Sanburn 2008, Morison 2001, All Hands ☆ Bri (talk) 12:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

p.s. apparently the Honolulu Rail Transit station just outside the gate is being named "Makalapa". Maybe there could be a note at Pearl Harbor Naval Base back to the craters article. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:39, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Vision Direct

Hi bri,

Out of curiosity what was wrong with my corrections? I tried to use first party sources to be as accurate as possible.

You seem to not be okay with that? Any 2nd party sources such as news outlets would just refer back to first party sources? no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TransportEngine (talk • contribs) 05:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@TransportEngine: please sign your talk messages with four tildes. As for the revert, you added then re-added press releases [2][3] which are not independent reliable sources. In fact it would be reasonable to view your edits, which to date are singular in the eyeglass retail category, as promotional. Such editing is strictly disallowed. I'll wait a bit for you to fix that, but the additions are subject to removal at any time. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:44, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @bri , When I was reading the info on how to make edits it said primary sources were okay if the met the following criteria

"A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge."

— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary,_secondary_and_tertiary_sources

I trust you as you are obviously more up to date with the criteria. I have updated a few articles in my life, going back to 2005, however I was just irritated that the Vision Direct article was wrong as I know they are owned by a larger company. It was not at all promotional. I decided to create an account when making my edits as Wikipedia encouraged me to do so. How is someone like me supposed to be allowed to make any edits if they're to be viewed as being "promotional" despite them being correcting inaccuracies.

This is not really the welcome party I was expecting and kinda makes me sad. All the best TransportEngine (talk) 18:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi @bri, I was able to get into my old account, I forgot the login for :) thanks for all your help so far! I will likely stick with this one if that is best? Grahas (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyedits

Thank you very much for leting me know about the copyedits. The way I write the name of my Mpther Tongue is Masry. I guess you find it ligustically better to write it as Masri. I am aware of the different versions, in opinion Masry suits the correct pronounciation better. Same for my name. Kind regards --Ghaly (talk) 18:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Transliteration is tricky, I know. We discussed the change at the newsroom and decided it would be better to use a single spelling that matches the usage in the Wikipedia article on Egyptian Arabic. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Glacier

Hi, Bri - question for you...if you look at the last paragraph, 2nd to last sentence on the page, the thermostat control is mentioned so I was wondering if the glacier image should be switched with the brick wall image?? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:41, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

But the paragraph the glacier image currently accompanies also speaks of the "decision to delegate such unleashed power to individual admins" matching the caption's phrase "the chilling effect of absolute power". The real reason I chose it is I simply find it a more interesting image (two guys in a boat, a huge craggy glacier, what are they doing, what's the story here? – vs a featureless brown wall and a pair of disembodied hands), and isn't it a maxim for newspaper-style writing to put the most interesting stuff up front?

All that said, if you feel strongly that it would create a better/truer presentation of your ideas, go ahead and swap them. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:41, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

You've convinced me. And Bri, thank you for your tireless contributions. Your work is much appreciated. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 00:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

If only I had known the extent of this (which I only recently read) before I was in the final stages of my article. It may be better to wait and see what happens rather than speculate but I would certainly be willing to contribute if something comes down the pipes, or whenever you & Smallbones think I could be of value. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 19:22, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jaktheladz

Hi Bri,

To follow up on why I closed your SPI case, there's several issues. First, the system logs that CUs use only go back 90 days. Since these accounts have not edited in that time, there's no log data to look at. They could still be blocked on behavioral evidence, but as I pointed out, they differ in behavior in a significant way, i.e. their timecard data. Second, WP:Blocking policy says we only block to prevent disruption. If the accounts are not being used, they're not actively disrupting anything. True, they might start up again in the future, but if they do, then we'll have new data in the system logs and can block them at that time based on better evidence. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I asked ANI what's right in this case. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Little Boy

I happened to see this edit. I'm no expert, but I presume that the meaning of projectile and target is as defined in the Assembly detail section of the article (and here). If I've got that right, is it necessary to add a footnote explaining that? I would think not. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 18:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hmmm.. How about saying: "... projectile and target components, although there were only enough initiator components ..."? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 20:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)s

Better, but my confusion initially was over bomb vs projectile. It's pretty weird to be talking about a projectile inside a bomb. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

MAUD Commitee

Hi! I'm searching for someone to contribute a review to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/MAUD Committee/archive1. Someone who is not one of the usual suspects. If you could have a look, that would be much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Youyang Gu COVID model

Hello! Your submission of Youyang Gu COVID model 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:47, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello Bri,

Your help can make a difference

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

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

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

Discussions and Resources

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

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

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

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

OpIndia and Wikipedia

Hi Bri, you may find the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 288 § OpIndia and Swarajya to be informative, if you have not yet read it. Please also see the WP:OUTING policy, which explains why your edit in Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/In the media was suppressed by an oversighter. If you have any questions about OpIndia's interactions with the Wikipedia community, I'll be happy to explain. Thanks. — Newslinger talk 09:00, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, that felt like stepping into a bit wet dog turd. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:53, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

I actually pitched Smallbones a story on the doxing incident for April, but wasn't able to complete it because I didn't have the needed permission from all of the involved parties – something that I should have expected but was too optimistic to realize ahead of time. Wikipedia editors who linger too long on the topic of OpIndia tend to receive ongoing harassment, so there have been quite a few oversight requests filed for this site. I hope this clears some things up! — Newslinger talk 15:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Coinrail

The article Coinrail has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

notability not established. dozens of exchanges have been robbed, those are news stories, and do not necessarily signal notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ysangkok (talk) 02:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Degrees

Hi. Can you point me to the rule that says that information on a person's CV cannot be used as a ref for facts in their article? I'm sure I've seen them used in a host of articles. Thanks. --184.153.21.19 (talk) 02:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Please see ....

User:Smallbones/Proposed commercial editing policy

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 02:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: David F. D'Alessandro

Hello Bri. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of David F. D'Alessandro, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G5 doesn't apply; the creator hasn't been blocked or banned, and there's been too many edits by too many other people since creation. I also don't think this is very spammy. Certainly needs some tidying, but it's a fairly balanced list of stuff he's done. . Thank you. GedUK  14:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ged UK: I thought the closer clearly said there was consensus to delete the UPE articles, i.e. the articles explicitly listed at the RfC (except those struck out before closure). Do you not agree? ☆ Bri (talk) 19:11, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. I wasn't aware of the RFC, I was just looking at the COIN noticeboard, which doesn't delete stuff. There is a consensus at the RfC to delete, though I'm not sure that that is the right CSD category to use, as they haven't created the article in contravention of a block/ban. Nevertheless, I've deleted it, citing the Wikipedia:WIKIPRO decision, which I think is a better way around it. GedUK  11:08, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

"JT Eberhard" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect JT Eberhard. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 19#JT Eberhard until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:24, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Great American Wiknic virtual edition 2020

WALRUS: Wikimedians Active in Local Regions of the United States W.A.L.R.U.S.

You are invited to the Great American Virtual Wiknic on Sunday, August 16, 2020, noon to 2pm 1st hour: National livestream via Streamyard / Youtube / social media (12-1pm Pacific) 2nd hour: Regional breakout rooms via Zoom / Wikimedia Meet, etc (1-2pm Pacific) Click here for more details!

04:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Why are you removing sources from beautypageants.indiatimes.com?

For example this edit, but there are others. Asha Bhat is an article about an Indian beauty pageant contestant. What is wrong with an article from the section of the India Times devoted to beauty pageants? I'd think that would be the ideal source for the subject. Your comment said see WP:RSN, but I don't see how that's relevant. Please be more specific. --GRuban (talk) 18:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

That site is native advertising. Go to [4] and read it for yourself: ETimes is an Entertainment, TV & Lifestyle industry's promotional website and carries advertorials and native advertising. It has been reported to WP:RSN and WP:BLACKLIST for this reason. We can't use advertising as an independent, reliable source. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Then that puts it among some pretty good company, such as Fast Company, BuzzFeed, Forbes, Vanity Fair, The Atlantic, Gawker, and The New York Times.[5] Unfortunately, using native advertising is a more and more common fact of the newspaper business, and you can see advertorials on most television stations during late nights, that doesn't make their news programs less reliable. The fact that it's "been reported" likewise means nothing, every few months some wise guy reports The New York Times and CNN to WP:RSN. Unless you can cite an actual decision that it should not be used, please restore. --GRuban (talk) 19:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Um, I don't think so. Did you read my post to RSN which includes the fact the "editorial" board for this sub-site is actually the pageant promoters? And the fact that two other editors agreed? Also, your example link shows several items that are clearly labeled "paid advertising" and we wouldn't accept them either. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, that's an actual argument that they are not independent from Miss India, since it is sponsored by the India Times group. But that's all right: we always accept an organization as a reliable source for the honors they themselves award, the most reliable source for such a thing, in fact. (If we want to cite that so and so was awarded a PhD from University X, we would absolutely cite a page from that university, for example.) And that is what they were being cited for in the place you removed it. Also, I'm not sure who the other two editors agreeing you mention are, the post to RSN only had your name and that of one other participant, Atlantic306, and they say exactly that: "this beauty pageant section does seem to be non-independent so not useful for notability but perhaps ok for very basic facts". That the contestant won this award is a very basic fact, since the whole point of the contest is the awarding of the award. If we were having a Wikipedia:Notability discussion (Asha Bhat is notable since, look, India Times is writing about her!), then we could argue that doesn't count, since they're just writing about their own award. But we're not, notability is established from a lot of other sources writing about her in multiple contexts, and you're trying to delete the source backing an honor she won, which it is fine for sourcing. --GRuban (talk) 23:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I believe this is moot now that it's been added to the blacklist. I couldn't restore the links even if I wanted to. ☆ Bri (talk) 13:59, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

It's been added due to your request! That makes it just a bit disingenuous, don't you think? Since it was just your request and just added hours ago, it would certainly be removed from the blacklist if you asked, and you would certainly be able to restore the links if you wanted to. --GRuban (talk) 15:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Whew, removed from the blacklist, thank goodness. Does what you wrote mean you are open to restoration? Do you want to read what I wrote there, and consider it OK to restore as long as the article being used is (a) not a native advertisement, and (b) if about Femina Miss India, only being used for basic facts that a primary source would be OK for? Or do you want to discuss further? --GRuban (talk) 11:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

If you want to discuss, may I ask for a self-interested temporary compromise while we're discussing? To be honest, I didn't know anything about beauty pageants until I decided to save a deleted article from the dead. I like doing that, gives me a nice, warm feeling (see the top of my user page for notice about that effect). That was User talk:RoySmith#Could you please userfy the deleted Miss Supranational article for me? and became Miss and Mister Supranational, which I consulted with the deleting administrator, and a few experienced editors, and pushed to main space after they did not object. beautypageants.indiatimes.com provided maybe 10 of the 78 references backing that article. Now that you removed them, the article is instead full of "citation needed" notices that you were kind enough to replace them with; and at least for some, there just isn't a better source for citing that, say, someone won Mister India to become the Mister Supranational candidate, than the Mister India pageant itself. May I at least restore those, after checking that they meet the (a) and (b) criteria above? See, I nominated it for DYK: Template:Did you know nominations/Miss and Mister Supranational - and without it, noticeable facts are uncited. I'll do the restoration here, and if we agree for a wholesale deletion, then I promise I'll delete them. We're both experienced reasonable editors, I think we will agree to either keep or delete the source eventually. --GRuban (talk) 11:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead and restore. We should still have a discussion on beauty pageant sourcing in general. If you check my recent edit history you can see what I'm trying to do. There's just a TON of really terrible sourcing to blogs, fansites, fake news sites and advertorials. Following the spambot reports [6] and sockpuppet investigations also indicates that there's probably an organized effort to get some of these sites in here, possible for SEO purposes. Your thoughts on how to address this are welcome. I've brought it up at RSN, WP:COIN, article talkpages, project talkpage, and now WP:WPSPAM – but without a simple, satisfying conclusion. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I admit, I didn't go deeply into your investigation, but are you sure these aren't just, you know, fans? I mean, that doesn't make the edits better, but beauty queens aren't unique in getting bad edits. Articles about actors, and pro wrestlers, and musicians, and sports stars, and politicians, all get regular waves of fans trying to add trivia to their articles, not because the fans are paid, but just because they like the subject. Like the subject a lot. Fan is short for fanatic, after all. Since the bad edits aren't all citing a single source, I would think that's more likely than a diabolical plot by multiple beauty pageant sources conspiring to spam the Wikipedia. If the bad edits were all adding normannorman.com to multiple articles for example, then maybe it's someone trying to benefit that web site. But if they're just trying to add miscellaneous information from multiple different sites, it seems, to me at least, to be more likely to be just fans. In doing the research for Miss Supranational, I found there were several large fan sites for beauty pageants, missisology was probably the biggest, but also normannorman, and ... one or two others I can't think of right now. So there really are fans out there for beauty queens, just like for rap singers or soccer goalies. --GRuban (talk) 21:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Restored the uses in Miss and Mister Supranational that are bare "who won what when" facts, and replaced the uses that were about Miss India winners winning Miss Supranational with other sources, since arguably that could be seen as promotional of Miss India. --GRuban (talk) 15:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, I started Wikipedia:WikiProject Beauty Pageants/Sources for your suggestion, so it's not limited to your user talk page: practical advice, naming specific sites with examples, etc. Once the two of us agree on much of it, we can get buy-in from other editors (the project says it's defunct, but it seems to have a fair amount of recent participation). If we then get it to agreement from most, we can ask for participation from editors outside the project, and make it into a Wikipedia:Guideline (and probably move it out of project space then). --GRuban (talk) 13:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

And in building that, I found that we have an article about one of the people running one of the probably-not-reliable beauty pageant sources: Conan Daily: Namesake and owner Conan Altatis has an article here, which is on the borders of Wikipedia:Notability at best. Take a look - do you agree it's worth nominating this article for deletion? --GRuban (talk) 15:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@GRuban: there’s a lot of passing mentions there but my guess is it would survive AfD. Have to admire, though, a publication that can report with a straight face the Century Tuna Superbods and its prizes including a one-year supply of Century Tuna products. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Bri:I can confirm Miss Supranational is one of the biggest pageants in the world of beauty pageants along with Miss Universe, Miss World, Miss Earth and Miss International. missworldpageantfan2020 (talk) 10:12, 27 October 2020 (EST)

Draft:Yehuda Ullmann

Please help create an article Draft:Yehuda Ullma nn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.157.42 (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to take the liberty of breaking this into its own section, as opposed to having it lost in our beautypageants.indiatimes.com discussion. I think you mean this draft article: Draft:Yehuda Ullmann? It seems to be worked on by User:Ovedc, an experienced paid editor. --GRuban (talk) 14:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Signpost topic?

Hey Bri, I don't really know much about how the Signpost works, but since you're involved in both that and COIN I figured you're a good person to talk to here. I've been working on an after-action review of the huge cross-wiki spam farm found at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Refspam_across_many_articles (work-in-progress draft is at m:User:GeneralNotability/Paper_sockfarm_AAR), and was wondering if you think that would be an interesting topic for the Signpost. If you think it is sufficiently interesting, I would be happy to either write something myself or provide information to a Signpost writer. GeneralNotability (talk) 16:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I tried to make the page view graphs, but the tool didn't work. I put a message on the responsible's talk page, though he's been MIA since August... igordebraga ≠ 18:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks igordebraga, I guess we'll do (partially) without for this issue. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Losing hope

I really don't know what to do anymore regarding unsourced/disruptive editing on pageantry articles like Miss Universe 2020. I patrol that page nearly daily and at this point I can't even keep up with all the information that has to be removed. I've tried to get problem editors blocked --- my reports are ignored, I've tried to lock the page --- the editors get access anyways. At this point so much information on that article is unsourced and it gets added back everyday. Any solutions you can think of? { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 20:30, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jjj1238: You could add your observations to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beauty Pageants/Sources and, if you agree with the direction it is going, add your support. Once consensus is gained, it will be much easier for admins to see there is a basis for sanctions (blocks) against disrupting editors. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jjj1238: A couple of disruptive editors have been blocked. Reports to WP:ANI are usually acted on, if you can describe it in terms of disruption and anti-consensus or uncommunicative behavior (or all three). This might have to be repeated a few times to show what is expected of participants in the topic area. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of AirTags for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AirTags 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/AirTags 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. 🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (talk) 10:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration motion

Regarding this inquiry: the motion didn't pass. isaacl (talk) 17:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I mis-read the proposed motion as a final decision. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

RfA - now the (re)time?

Hi Bri,

I know you ran an RfA back in 2016, and that after declining to do it several times due to gauntlet concerns - some of which came into being.

However, in the last year or two RfA has been, while from from universally ideal, somewhat better and less demanding of perfection.

Could you see yourself considering re-running? Nosebagbear (talk) 14:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

I've been thinking of how to respond to this post for a few days. I think the simple answer is, I don't really seek adminship at this time. I'm not sure whether I will or will not in the future. Right now it sounds like taking on a new job, not much fun, and a new way to get harassed. Maybe my mind will change in the future, especially if the predictions about declining administrator cadre become true and we start to have more problems because of it. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

While I'm around, I'll just add that in the aftermath of my desyoping, had I never been an admin and if anyone were too suggest I ran now, in today's overall climate on Wikipedia my reply would be 'Not bloody likely'. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Question about paid editing template

We received an inquiry at OTRS about the paid editing template on Ampd Energy. Yes, it was added quite some time ago (Oct 2017). I believe you added it, and cited: this edit. I looked at the edit, possibly too quickly, but did not see any reference to Ampd, so I don't know how to answer their question. Not surprisingly, they would like to know what has to be done to remove it, and the first step is to understand why it was added. Can you shed any light on this?--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:54, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: (talk page stalker) It's because the article was created by Prof.Marlin part of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Liborbital/Archive. I wonder whether it meets WP:CORP. SmartSE (talk) 13:23, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Smartse, Thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Just so. Thanks for replying. Their notability is borderline so I didn’t bother nominating. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello - re: Oshwah / Blackstone

Hi Bri, thanks for your message. Honestly at first I thought I had made a mistake in doing so, as you say. But the more I thought about it and researched... the more I realised sometimes it is important to speak truth to power - even on Wikipedia. You willsee at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Blackstone_&_shill_account_Theoracle102 that a senior editor has come along and agreed that indeed there is literally * zero * doubt about what is going on. So the question is did Oshwah either not bother to look into things before making a judgement, or are they are a paid editor? I don't know either way, but that question is now out there in the public for us to consider. Colinmcdermott (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@Colinmcdermott: All I can tell you is I've been one of the leaders of dealing with undeclared paid editing on Wikipedia for a few years, and I have seen absolutely no reason to think Oshwah is doing anything nefarious. Please reconsider before you shoot yourself in the foot... ☆ Bri (talk) 15:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I see my warning was too late. Oh, well. - Bri.public (talk) 16:01, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Tagging of Rave Mobile Safety

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Rave Mobile Safety. I do not think that Rave Mobile Safety fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because "won the Jeanne Clery Campus Safety award for their implementation of the Rave Guardian product" is a claim of significance. See also WP:CCSI#All subjects; As for G11, this is largely factual in tone, and can be edited to be fully NPOV.. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead, if this was an article, or another process such as MfD or XfD as appropriate. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:38, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

In this edit you removed several YouTube sources with the comment deleted five YouTube refs and dependent content. YT is not a reliable source That is simply inaccurate. YouTube is not a source, it is a platform. Much of the content posted there is not reliable. A fair amount is reliable. Please read WP:YOUTUBE (if you have not) where it says While there is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, the links must abide by the guidelines on this page. ... Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked, either in the article or in citations. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. (emphasis added) The links you removed all seem to have been uploaded by Rave Mobile Safety itself. If they were created by RMS, they are primary, self-published sources, subject to the same restrictions as, say, the company web site. However, at least one seems to be a copy of a new broadcast, and therefore reliable. That copy might be a copyright infringement, but the original broadcast, if it is available, should be usable, even if it is on YouTube. The copy might be usable if it was uploaded with the permission 0of the copyright holder. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:33, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Epidiolex packaging.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Radio KAOS (Slovenia) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Radio KAOS (Slovenia) 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/Radio KAOS (Slovenia) 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. Raymie (t • c) 03:27, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Signpost

Yeah, according to Special:Log/massmessage, you sent it out twice. I think you have some unsubscriptions. Great to see a new issue though! Thanks for all of your work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I received it twice, and can see users on my watchlist have received it twice too. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:12, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Followup at WT:Wikipedia Signpost#Duplicate delivery?. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Suzuki Hayabusa

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Suzuki Hayabusa you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of David Fuchs -- David Fuchs (talk) 17:20, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Beauty pageant AfD

For stalkers -- I have nominated about a dozen articles dominated by three beauty pageant sockfarms in a bundled AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roxanne Allison Baeyens. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:01, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

MarcoAntonio007

the user you warned for disruptive edting is now doing it on the Legality of bestiality by country or territory page. can you help? --Delderd (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Reported at Administrators' noticeboard/incidents ☆ Bri (talk) 19:11, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject on open proxies discussion

Hello, you are receiving this message because you have either contributed to Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests in the past six months or are an active editor listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/verified users. I have started a discussion regarding the project's current status at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject on open proxies#Reboot, you are invited to participate in the discussion. If you are not interested in the project, no action is required on your part; this is a one-time notification and you will not receive any further messages. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC) (on behalf of User:GeneralNotability)

Your GA nomination of Suzuki Hayabusa

The article Suzuki Hayabusa you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Suzuki Hayabusa for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of David Fuchs -- David Fuchs (talk) 16:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.