User talk:Itcouldbepossible/Archive 2022/June

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


Administrators' newsletter – June 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
  • The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Draftified articles

Hi. You draftified two of my articles just now. 1) It has always been understood (and indeed I believe is guideline) that a suitable amount of time needs to be allowed to elapse for newly-created pages to be properly edited (both articles were, what, two hours old when you drafted them?) 2) Both articles had multiple sources attesting to notability and so on included, so I really don't know why they were draftified for allegedly meeting WP:N. If you have any questions, please do get in touch. Atchom (talk) 05:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Well, maybe less that that. Well, even if I accept what you say, then that guideline is for pages made by newcomers. That method is followed so that newcomers doesn't get unencouraged at the very beginning. But, I think that is not applicable for you. And that page was not 'too new'. There is a saying, not to draftify pages that has been in the mainspace for less than 15 minutes. But does you article qualify that? Even if I accept the fact that draftifying was my mistake, I still have something to ask. My question is, what is the problem if the articles are improved or edited, keeping it in the draftspace? Then you can easily submit it for review, or move it to mainspace directly (the latter is applicable for you, since you have already created many articles). If you are talking about notability, then I don't think they are. Can you tell me if they meet WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Even if they are, then adding references only wouldn't help. You will also have to add inline citations as well. Moreover, I think the references are self published or user generated and isn't accepted here. You need to add verifiable reliable sources. Best if you can add a few secondary sources. Thanks for commenting. Regards, Itcouldbepossible Talk 09:46, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Well, John C. Pope looks notable now. But you have to develop the other draft to establish notability. Itcouldbepossible Talk 09:48, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Itcouldbepossible, Atchom has been editing here for 16 years. You haven't been editing here for 16 months! Please look at the experience level of page creators before consideing draftifying articles. If they are articles created by editors who are experienced, it's not realistic to ask them to go through AFC. AFC is for inexperienced, new editors who are not familiar with Wikipedia's standards for notability, sourcing and copyright guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
@Liz Well, thanks for you comment. But shouldn't we draftify articles made my experienced or old users? I didn't ask them to go through AFC though. I said, or move it to mainspace directly (the latter is applicable for you, since you have already created many articles), which means, that I second option that is to move it directly to mainspace is applicable for him, since he has created so many articles already, and many of them are in good standing. Correct me if I said something wrong. Itcouldbepossible Talk 04:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
And moreover, if you are talking about experience, then Draft:Recti muscles (eye) this draft was draftified by me many months back, when I knew almost nothing about Wikipedia. And the user was quite experienced (though not as much as Atchom), and here he is thanking me for draftifying his article. All this justification is not to prove what you have said is right or wrong. I just want to know the correct thing, as I am still learning about everything. Making mistakes and learning from them is also necessary. Itcouldbepossible Talk 04:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-23

02:45, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

hello - wrongful deletion of an article on a sitting mayor of liberia capital city

Hello there there you deleted an article for no valid reason all the info in the article is correct and notarized, he is the mayor, he was appointed by the president... his education information is correct, he was the leader of large youth groups before mayoral appointment SPwiki4africa (talk) 08:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

ICC Women's T20 Champions Cup

Why have you moved/deleted the article ‘ICC Women's T20 Champions Cup' ? An ideal student (talk) 10:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

@An ideal student: Itcouldbepossible has already informed you of their move and reasoning at your talk page. ––FormalDude talk 04:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC) (talk page watcher)

Tech News: 2022-24

16:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Itcouldbepossible,

Please do not tag expiring draft early for CSD G13. We go by the exact date and time of the last human edit, adjusting for any daylight savings time difference that might exist in your country. We have several admins watching the list of expiring drafts and are pretty on top of things. Thank you for your contributions. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Liz Sorry for that, but as far as I remember, the last edit on the draft was made on 16 December 2022, so 17 December 2022 would be appropriate, as far as I think. What do you say. It is not that I saw the list. I knew of the draft, and also knew that it had not been edited for a long time, and that is why CSDed it. You can see from my CSD Log that this is my first G13 deletion. It is not that I follow the list, but is there any list? Sorry for the disruption caused. Itcouldbepossible Talk 03:11, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Swap 3

Hello Itcouldbepossible,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Swap 3 for deletion, because it seems to be a test. Did you know that the Wikipedia Sandbox is available for testing out edits?

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Swap 2

Hello Itcouldbepossible,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Swap 2 for deletion, because it seems to be a test. Did you know that the Wikipedia Sandbox is available for testing out edits?

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka Ok ok, calm down. There was no need CSD them just after seconds. I said it was a test. I could have deleted it myself. This G2 deletions should be made for test pages created by newcomers, not by someone who is a little more experienced. I could have CSDed them myself. What was the hurry?Itcouldbepossible Talk 06:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Making test edits in Wikipedia mainspace is considered vandalism. Please don't do it again. ––FormalDude talk 07:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

About Swap 2 and Swap 3

Hello. I have noticed your test pages Swap 2 and Swap 3, and have G2'ed it. Please consider doing test moves within your userspace instead of doing it in article space. Thanks! NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-25

20:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello Itcouldbepossible/Archive 2022,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 9320 articles, as of 14:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders
  • Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
  • If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
  • To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Notes
  1. ^ not including another ~6,000 redirects
  2. ^ The number of weekly reviews reported in the NPP feed includes redirects, which are not included in the backlog we primarily track.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

AFD

Please don't close discussions that are barely an hour old. Primefac (talk) 16:41, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Really sorry for that Primefac. But that was to be a SNOW keep. Snow keeps can be closed quickly isn't it? The editor is a new one, that too sending an article for AFD without any good reason. It also looked like a SPA for creating the AFD only. The article had established notability, and there wasn't any problem though. What do you say?Itcouldbepossible Talk 04:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
This was a poor close, and definetely not applicable under the snowball clause. There were no votes at the time of your closure. A SNOW close will have multiple votes showing an overwhelmingly clear consensus, to the point that the process is no longer considered necessary. This AfD, less than an hour old and with no participation, obviously needed to continue. ––FormalDude talk 05:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
FormalDude Ohh..ok I know understand it. I will be careful from next time. Thanks for you explanation. Best, Itcouldbepossible Talk 06:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Just to add to FormalDude's reply, I think the largest reason not to snow close was that the previous AFD was a delete result, meaning that regardless of the current status of the article, there is a precedent for deletion (i.e. people have thought in the past it should be deleted). In general, though, the closer of an AFD should not be making editorial decisions; you say The article had established notability but with no actual !votes in the discussion, that is your determination, making it somewhat of a supervote.
For what it's worth, it's not the end of the world; the best thing to do is learn from these sorts of situations :-) Primefac (talk) 07:31, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Primefac Thanks again for showing your patience in handling this matter. I will surely learn from this mistake as well, as I have learnt from many other. Regards, Itcouldbepossible Talk 07:36, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Any time :-) Primefac (talk) 20:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-26

20:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)