User talk:Rosguill/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 → Archive 20

State House News Service

Hello, @Rosguill:

Please forgive any ineptitude in using your talkspace! First time user. On April 28, 2020, you moved [[draft:state house news service]|State House News Service,]] an article I wrote, back into draftspace, urging me to include more verifiable citations. I have no objection, but at the end of the narrative, much of what I know to be true about the News Service I know from lived experience. That is, when I write about moving the Service into the digital era, I did it, and very little external has been written about it. Yet the 100ks of readers in Massachusetts who see our company name may go right to Wikipedia to find out more. But if the narrative ends with news of the sale of the company to me in 1996, it won't be at all a complete story. What do you advise?

Thank you so much for your help!

Craig Sandler

Crsandler, unfortunately, your lived experience is not something that we are allowed to use as a source on Wikipedia, as it is a form of original research, which is not allowed. In fact, it's also evidence of a conflict of interest between you and the publication. While you are not barred from contributing to articles whose subjects you have a conflict with, it is strongly discouraged, and you are equally strongly encouraged to use the articles for creation system rather than moving the article into mainspace yourself. If you are interested in getting the article published so that readers have something to find about the publication, I would suggest removing all information that cannot be cited to an independent reliable source and resubmitting the article. You can save existing prose that you've written in a subpage of your userpage, such as User:Crsandler/SHNS draft, and then propose the addition of content (once it's properly sourced) by making an edit request on the article's talk page. If no independent sources are available, then I would suggest that the most productive thing that you could do as someone with first-hand knowledge of the subject would be to try to get an independent source to cover the publication, thus creating a source that we may be able to use on Wikipedia, or failing that, writing up your account of the history of the SHNS in an SHNS publication and thus creating a primary source that an independent source could use to write a more objective piece. signed, Rosguill talk 20:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
As for how to use talk pages, in the future I would suggest creating new discussions using the "New section" button near the top of the page, and be sure to sign all of your comments with four tildes like so ~~~~ to generate a signature automatically. signed, Rosguill talk 20:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Rosguill, you may not hear THIS every day, but that sounds like fun - well, a modified form of fun, as Milk is a modified form of sweat! Anyway, I am not too surprised by your answer - have already been mulling over some ways to anchor my narrative outside myself. Whether I'm successful, well, it might be a process, but we'll see and I'll learn a good deal I would think about making value on WP! Thanks for the guidance. Craig Sandler

Palmyra Atoll RfD

I don't think retargeting the two redirects that you found no consensus for to Palmyra Atoll#Economy is the correct result, given that they don't revolve around economy much at all – nor did anyone suggest that retargeting was the correct option for those two redirects. On reflection though, there's a bit about transportation at Palmyra Atoll#Economy so Palmyra Atoll/Transportation probably should be targeted there, even though I do not believe that there was consensus to do so. A bit of a mess but basically I don't think your close was correct here. — J947 [cont] 22:34, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Redirection sociotype

Information icon Hello, I'm Philogik. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Sociotype have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. You are invited to not delete the article, but rather use the discussion page if you want discuss about your point. Thank you —Preceding undated comment added 02:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

  • (talk page stalker) @Philogik: See DTTR and take on Rosguill's advice – develop the content at Draft:Sociotype – for further work on the article. This edit summary was highly inapplicable to Rosguill's redirection; be careful to not inappropriately label others' contributions. — J947 [cont] 02:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
    There is something vaguely adorable about templating an admin with a level-1 vandalism template. signed, Rosguill talk 04:10, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Freedom of religion in Norway

On 1 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Freedom of religion in Norway, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that sympathetic accounts of Norway's first Christian kings include descriptions of them committing gruesome torture against pagans, but non-sympathetic accounts do not? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Freedom of religion in Norway. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Freedom of religion in Norway), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

readded Callanecc

Oversight changes

readded HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Request Denied

My recent request denied by you and you asked - "I'm seeing a fair amount of non-neutral phrasing even in relatively recent articles."

So Please Sir explain about this and give me any example about "fair amount of non-neutral phrasing" In my recent articles. I want to learn. Thank You. Pk41946 (talk) 05:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Pk41946 Several of the movie articles that you created over the past year described the films in entirely too positive terms. Equally concerning, the articles appear to have been written before the film's release, and have not been updated with any coverage of critical assessment. These are both red flags as far as your understanding of the policies and guidelines that are at the core of review work, and I don't see any other strong signal that tells me otherwise. signed, Rosguill talk 07:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you sir, I am completely satisfied with your answer, I will do my best to correct my mistakes. Pk41946 (talk) 09:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Review

Hi Rosguill,

I notice that you recently reviewed a page that I created, 'Templemore apparitions'. Could you please let me know what a review of a page is and if these reviews are available to see? Its nothing major, just curious as I keep seeing review notifications every week and I'd like to know a bit more about that.EricthePinko (talk) 14:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

EricthePinko, the reviews are part of the new page patrol, which is a quality control process for newly created articles. Other than comments that a new page reviewer chooses to leave behind on the talk page (or in the form of a template), there isn't a formal review that gets drawn up, rather it's just a basic check that everything is in order. In particular, we're checking that the article's subject meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, that the article is free of copyright violations, and that there aren't any other egregious issues like BLP violations or obvious promotionalism. signed, Rosguill talk 16:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, Thanks! EricthePinko (talk) 18:59, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Clarification and request

Dear Rosguill, currently I am focused on anti-vandalism edits/reverts and under-going training both at CVUA and NPP schools. I am not doing any CSD of AfC tagging except accepting/rejecting a few valid redirect requests after proper scrutiny only. Now in CVUA, I am required to tag some CSD and submit them in assignments. So can I do it using Twinkle (I require two examples to submit in my answers for assignment 6)? Thank you. Amkgp (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Amkgp, I would take this up with your instructor and leave it to their discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 19:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, Ok. Thank you Amkgp (talk) 19:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill any updates ? As of now only two examples are required, I was thinking of providing diffs from my older correct CSD tagging in assignments (if I can retrieve them) with an explanatory note in my CVUA talk page if the decision stands no. But I don't know whether more such tagging will be required in future assignments. Thank you Amkgp (talk) 15:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Amkgp, there's nothing for me to update you on, I had suggested that you take this up with your instructor. signed, Rosguill talk 17:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

How can I create a page that has been deleted before

Hi, I created an article about a college softball head coach named Cindy Ball-Malone. I had created other pages just like it that were approved and that one wasn’t and it was deleted. I tried recreating it and got it approved but then it was deleted again because it wasn’t approved the first time or something like that. This coach is now a candidate for a bigger job and I would like to recreate and have it approved without it being deleted. Can you help? Thanks! Eibln (talk) 23:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Eibln, you can open a request at WP:DRV, just follow the instructions in the second section. signed, Rosguill talk 23:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill I hate to ask, but is there any way I could get you to put in the request for me to recreate the article or fix it so I can recreate the article? I am not really understanding the directions very well. I had recreated the article again after it was deleted and it was approved, but then it was deleted again because you have to get approval to recreate it. Eibln (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Eibln, in that case, could you provide me the sources that were written since the deletion of the article that you think establish the subject's notability? If I think that there's a chance that editors will agree that the new sources are enough to justify the recreation of the article, I'll file the request. signed, Rosguill talk 22:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill If you are asking for all the sources I used in the article when I created it, here they are:

[1][2][3][4][5][6]

I have used the same types of sources for several other articles I have created and had approved. So, I don't see why these wouldn't work. Eibln (talk) 23:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Eibln, if you don't have any additional sources to provide, then I'm afraid that there's no basis for overturning the prior AfD decision. From glancing at those sources, there isn't nearly enough coverage in secondary sources to meet WP:GNG. If you've had similar articles approved in the past, odds are that they inadvertently met one of the SNGs listed at WP:NSPORTS, making the availability of secondary sources a moot point at review time. signed, Rosguill talk 23:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, 3 or 4 of the sources that I gave, I added the second time around when the article was reviewed and approved. But unfortunately, it was deleted again because the article had previously been deleted. The issue I have is that I didn't even get a chance to fix it. By the time I got the notification that is was going to be deleted, it was already gone. Every other time, they have moved the article into draftspace which they didn't do with this one article. I believe these sources should be enough according to the second time it was reviewed and approved. I don't know if that changes anything. Eibln (talk) 23:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Eibln, I'm not really sure what that reviewer saw in the article (or if they missed the prior AfD), but given that they were an experienced and well respected page reviewer, there's a chance that others will agree. I'll post this to DRV in a bit. signed, Rosguill talk 00:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
{{u|Rosguill}, Thank you so much. The Editor that had approved was very well respected. He has since retired or has gone inactive according to his talk page. He was my go to reviewer and always answered my questions. I would hope people would agree with his assessment that the article should be approved and recreated.Eibln (talk) 00:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "CINDY BALL-MALONE". UCFKnights.com. UCF Athletics. Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  2. ^ "Cindy Ball Named Softball Head Coach". BroncoSports.com. BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY ATHLETICS. Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  3. ^ "Time To Ball". UCFKnights.com. UCF Athletics. Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  4. ^ "BOISE STATE LOSES SOFTBALL COACH CINDY BALL TO CENTRAL FLORIDA". IdahoPress.com. Idaho Press. Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  5. ^ "BREAKING: UCF Names Cindy Ball New Softball Head Coach". BlackAndGoldBanneret.com. Vox Media, Inc. Retrieved 2 August 2019.
  6. ^ "MWC Softball Record Book" (PDF). TheMW.com. Mountain West Conference. Retrieved 2 August 2019.

FYI

[1] (This editor's recent behavior is ... very strange.) --JBL (talk) 21:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Joel B. Lewis, I wrote a polite warning on their talk page and will keep an eye on the situation. signed, Rosguill talk 22:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! --JBL (talk) 22:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
And thanks again for cleaning up the whole weird mess. --JBL (talk) 01:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Joel B. Lewis, no problem, although boy that went downhill fast. signed, Rosguill talk 01:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

New page reviewer right

Hello @Rosguill:, I am currently looking for more ways to contribute to Wikipedia/a hobby to start participating in besides small copy editing and the random pages patrol of which I just recently started participating in, and I was wondering if you had some tips for me to possibly join the new page patrol and what I should do to get the permission temporarily, thanks. ExemplaryScholar (talk) 13:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

ExemplaryScholar, I would suggest that you try contributing to areas related to reviewing that don't require any special permissions. In particular, participating at AfD, volunteering at articles for creation and/or creating new articles yourself are good ways to demonstrate that you understand the relevant policies. Read through the notability guidelines carefully, as understanding them is crucial to work in these fields. signed, Rosguill talk 17:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Alright, much appreciated, thank you. ExemplaryScholar (talk) 18:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Tell me that how can I be a new page reviver Preetikasingh (talk) 14:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

The above advice is generic, there's really nothing else for me to add. That having been said, based on the drafts that you keep asking me to review, I would say that you are a long way from demonstrating that you understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines well enough to review articles. signed, Rosguill talk 16:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Sig

I hope you don’t mind if I copy your little signed, from sig for mine. Thanks, Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 18:48, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines, feel free, I kinda doubt I'm the first to do that, and I've seen some people copy way more of my signature without asking for permission lol. signed, Rosguill talk 18:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Just wanted to tell you lol. Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 20:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Hey Rosguill, hope you dont mind as I copied your signature for my own use, actually I liked your signature when I first saw it and honestly I cant think of a better sig myself, if you have any objections I can change it. Thanks. signed, Antila' talk 05:33, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Antila, feel free to keep it, but I'd encourage you to think of a further variation on the theme, even if only for your own sake (other editors may find it weird that you're mimicking my signature that closely). You can find more inspiration here, or littered across any active noticeboard. signed, Rosguill talk 05:46, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, I have changed my signature. Antila talk 13:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Antila, looks nice! signed, Rosguill talk 16:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh no, I have started a wave of Rosguill sig takers! Lol, Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 16:11, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:Bsn

I reverted your edit because it left a mess behind, since you didn't change any of its existing redirects to Template:BSicon-name before retargeting it. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 22:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

AlgaeGraphix, my bad for not fixing the incoming links, but the better way to resolve this would have been to fix the links in accordance with the discussion outcome. signed, Rosguill talk 22:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Heavenly horses

It's a shame when you spent a lot of time writing an article and your work was removed. Okay, I'll do as you say.

I still don't understand you, on what grounds did you delete my article? Why delete the whole article? You would have warned me and I would have corrected it. Or do you think that the content of the article repeats other articles? If you think so, you have not even read my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rialex217 (talk • contribs) 02:56, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Rosguill. I was about to AFD that article when you reverted it. It appears that the purpose of this fork was the three unreferenced paragraphs in the middle, promoting the object depicted. Kanguole 21:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Kanguole, I see, that seems like a reasonable explanation. Tbh I'm willing to bet that there is some sort of article that could be written at Heavenly horses that would be worth keeping, but the article as it existed prior to me restoring the redirect was not a productive step in that direction. signed, Rosguill talk 22:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Good afternoon, Rosguill.
Why did you delete my article for no reason?
There was no article on the page at all.
I wrote it, and you ruined my work. The look of Chinese one-sided historians doesn't show the breadth of nomadic history. I'm asking you to restore my article. If I have to, I'll supplement the article further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rialex217 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Rialex217, you can read my reasoning in my edit summary for that edit, which I'll include again here: good-faith revert, seems to contain a lot of WP:OR, non-neutral language, and hard-to-parse prose, and appears to contradict better-written content at Tianma, War of the Heavenly Horses. Consider working on a draft before moving to mainspace and/or expanding those other articles. I'll add to that that I should have also linked Ferghana horse as another article with more information about the subject, as well as Kanguole's objections which you can read above your comment in this section. Do you have any response to these arguments? signed, Rosguill talk 02:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Good afternoon
I strongly disagree with Kanguole one-sided Chinese views on Chinese history.
The history of China is not only the history of the Chinese people, but also the history of many other nations that have lived and are living on Chinese territory. You do not show the views of other nations on history.
If there are any flaws in the article, I'll fix them. But you don't have to remove alternative views of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rialex217 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
If you have an issue with the content of other articles, the solution is to edit those articles, not to create a fork that includes your preferred narrative. If you're right about the other articles being one-sided, then you're doing yourself a disservice by siloing off this information into a separate article, as that will do nothing to improve the existing article. My objection to the article has nothing to do with your views vs. Chinese historiography, but I am concerned that you provided insufficient sources to support your claims. If you still think that it's necessary to create a new article, I would suggest using the Articles for creation process so that you can receive coaching from editors about how to properly cite and format articles. signed, Rosguill talk 02:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
I've been looking at the history of changes to existing articles, Kanguole won't let me amend them. I can write a new big article about heavenly horses and paste it into existing articles. But I'm not happy with the title of the article. A heavenly horse is not equal to a Ferghana horse, that's not right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rialex217 (talk • contribs)
I would suggest as a productive first step, that you should collect all of the sources that you want to use to write content about horses in Central Asian culture. Once you have that, assess how the sources refer to the subject. Are they writing about "heavenly horses", "Ferghana horses" or do they call the topic something else? Once you've figured that out, you'll have your answer as to where the content needs to go, and then we can figure out whether it's better to write a new article or to adapt an existing one. signed, Rosguill talk 02:54, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Request

Kindly confirm my new article named Lakhahi State or Lakhahi Estate on wiki as a new Page Preetikasingh (talk) 03:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

That is in my Sandbox Preetikasingh (talk) 03:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Preetikasingh, assuming you mean this article, that article is not ready to be moved to mainspace yet. I would suggest reading through our guide to writing your first article if you haven't already. signed, Rosguill talk 04:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I had made new draft. Please check and confirm Preetikasingh (talk) 14:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Preetikasingh, it would be a lot easier for me to figure out which drafts you want me to look at if you actually provided links to them here. At any rate, assuming you mean Draft:Lakhahi Raj, it is not ready to be an article as it has no citations to any sources whatsoever. signed, Rosguill talk 16:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

If I provide citations then it will be published Preetikasingh (talk) 02:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Preetikasingh it will still need to comply with our neutrality policies and notability guidelines and not include any copyright violations, but yes adding citations is the first step to getting it published. signed, Rosguill talk 02:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

What other things are required please tell Preetikasingh (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Preetikasingh, I'm sorry, I don't have time to answer all of your questions. I would suggest reading our guide to writing your first article. If you still have questions after reading through that article carefully, try asking at the teahouse, our noticeboard for helping new editors. signed, Rosguill talk 02:56, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Citations are published Preetikasingh (talk) 03:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

And there is no copyright violation Preetikasingh (talk) 03:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I really don't have time to walk you through how to create an article. Take your questions to the teahouse. signed, Rosguill talk 03:13, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Request of adoption

Dear User:Rosguill; I modified my wikipedia name to the fictitious "Count Von Aubel", but you already helped me once reviewing a few modifications I made to a Geometry article and providing me with useful suggestions. Would you consider again the possibility to adopt me? I am going to write soon a new Geometry article in which probably you are not very much interested, but I am planning also to write a couple of "biographies" which are considered the most difficult ones. Here I would really appreciate your help. Hope to hear from you; Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 16:52, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Count Von Aubel, hello again! What kind of biographies were you looking into writing, and what kind of assistance are you anticipating that you might need? signed, Rosguill talk 18:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Dear User:Rosguill, happy to hear from you. One is about a country-blues band from Pisa, maybe it cannot really be considered a biography, it would be an article regarding the band, simply. They are not worldwide renowned, I think they attended a few international contests (Europe and United States), achieving good results and they published a few studio albums. The second one is about a British actor, as well not worldwide renowned, he mostly appeared in advertising spots and minor roles in movies (one movie was quite popular: In the name of the father). Of course I am not confident in writing such articles and I have minor conflicts of interest in the sense that I know some members of the band and I am in a correspondence with this actor. About him, I am not sure if he will be happy me to write about him in wikipedia and therefore I would prefer to ask him first. Maybe you can already point out if these subjects can be considered notable, and of course, you can help me with the exposition as I am not a native English speaker, but also, I am do not posses high expository skills. Thank you very much for your attention and Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 18:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Farhad Salafzoon

Hi. I noticed that you revert my edits. Please revert your edits. In case of his last name, please see his Instagram and other pages.  MrInfo2012  Talk  17:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

MrInfo2012, I didn't revert you because your edits were wrong, but rather because you did a WP:COPYPASTE move. Such moves disrupt Wikipedia's edit history, which could cause us legal problems if left unchecked. I see that you've started a move request, which is the correct way to resolve this issue (although I think that you left a typo in it, as you're currently suggesting to move Salafzoon –> Salafzoon). I would act on it myself, but last time I closed what I thought was an uncontroversial move request before waiting the suggested week-long waiting period people got quite annoyed at me, so I'm going to hold off for now. If no one's acted on the request a week from now, let me know and I'll be able to close it. signed, Rosguill talk 18:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your cooperation. You can see his name on his Instagram page here. Also I do have his passport and if you provide me a way, I can show you his correct identity data. A week is so long for a page renaming. Please so so something.  MrInfo2012  Talk  18:58, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

MrInfo2012, please try to be patient. Discussions on Wikipedia often take months to resolve, and even more months for someone to determine what the result was. One week is rather short in the grand scheme of things. A passport is not necessary, or even desired, as the article's title should reflect how Salafzoon is referred to in reliable sources (although it does appear that they prefer the oo-spelling so there doesn't appear to be any conflict). I would note, however, that if you have access to Salafzoon's passport, you are likely to have a conflict of interest with the subject and should probably disclose this on your user page before making further edits. You can find an explanation of how to make such a disclosure at WP:COI. signed, Rosguill talk 19:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for granting my request

Hi! I just wanted to say thank you for granting my new page reviewer request. I'll be sure to do the required 10-20 reviews before the two weeks are up. I'm very excited to have a new tool to help out! Cheers, Paradoxsociety 07:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Paradoxsociety, no problem, feel free to stop by if you need any guidance. If you're ever stuck while reviewing an article and aren't sure what the right call to make is, I'd recommend watchlisting it, making a note of what your gut intuition about the correct course of action is, and then see how the next reviewer to come along handles it. signed, Rosguill talk 07:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Rosguill. So I decided to get started tonight after reading through the tutorials and such. I started off trying to pick two articles from the back of the queue and noticed that they had both been recently converted from redirects to articles. I suppose I must have missed or misunderstood WP:NPPREDIRECT towards the bottom of the tutorial. Would you mind taking a quick look at my last few contribs starting with Talk:Unique identifier and let me know what, if anything, I should have done differently, and separately what I should do for those two articles at this point? I'd love to sign up for your training as well if you'd be willing to have me. Paradoxsociety 05:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
To clarify, as I've moved onto other tasks for the moment, I am referring to the five edits in my contribs log starting at 2020-05-08T22:19:22. Paradoxsociety 05:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Paradoxsociety I think you have the right intuition about both the Unique identifier and the space shuttle articles––I'd actually already looked at them myself. However, they have been very recently created. As such, there's a chance that the editor whose work you undid (or criticized) is going to get defensive and/or angry (although it looks like you've got a sign of good faith on at least one front, which is always nice). Unless the article has blatant issues like obvious vandalism, it's usually a good idea to wait until it's been left alone for at least a day to give editors time to develop articles. In the case of Unique identifiers, it looks like that's one editor working unilaterally so when it's sat for long enough you can just revert and give your reasoning. On the shuttles article, because there's already been a recent consensus at Talk:Reusable_launch_system#Splitting_proposal_12_April_2020, it should be challenged on the article talk page (although it's still best to give it time to breathe). These aren't major errors or formal policy, but I think that if you follow this advice people will get mad at you less often. At this point I think that you should just follow through on both of these in good faith, but your intuition is in the right place. You may want to propose moving the conversation currently happening on Pancho's talk page to the article talk page so that other editors interested can participate more easily.
An additional note is that the very back of the queue is always a bit choppy because articles are sorted by creation date, not date added to the queue. As such, you end up seeing a lot of articles that were recently converted from articles to redirects or vice versa. It's probably the most difficult part of the queue to patrol because you run into both a lot of vandalism, and a lot of good faith editors who just don't happen to write C-class articles in the first few hours of their existence. Edit wars often end up there too. I'd suggest jumping forward to the back of the cliff when you're just starting out, which is the place where the real backlog begins and it's actually articles that were created 103 days ago (or however far back it's stretching at this moment). signed, Rosguill talk 05:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the detailed analysis and feedback Rosguill. The user who was working on the UIN page ended up getting blocked for sockpuppetry today so I guess that ends the discussion on that one for now. As for Pancho's stuff, it looks like the reusable spacecraft article has been expanded a bit today. I moved the discussion to the talk page. At this point should I just discuss informally there for a few days? Maybe tag the articles for merging and start a formal discussion? In the meantime I'll move back to the other side of the queue so that I can maybe find a few easier cases as I get started. Thanks again. Paradoxsociety 03:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Paradoxsociety, at this point it's pretty clear that they're going to keep working on it and another reviewer has already marked it as approved so I think you can just let that one go. signed, Rosguill talk 03:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Understood, will do! Paradoxsociety 04:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Autopatrolled request denied

I have recently applying for Autopatrolled rights but you are denied my request by asking- "even from just looking at the most recent article you've created, Sabrang Film Awards the mountain of citations at the end of the first section suggests that your articles could benefit from an independent review." So can I not give much citation on any article and what is this independent review. Please Ask About this. Pk41946 (talk) 08:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Pk41946, here's an essay explaining some of the problems with providing too many citations. Generally speaking, you almost never need more than one or two citations at the end of a sentence. The "independent review" is just new pages patrol, and the only purpose of autopatrol is to have your articles exempted from it. I would expect editors applying for permissions to have an understanding of what these permissions do. signed, Rosguill talk 18:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reply Pk41946 (talk) 19:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your close at Talk:Equinox and subsequent work retargeting redirects - much appreciated. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ggg3243

Blocked all three. Doug Weller talk 12:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

NPP School

Hey Rosguill, would you mind teaching me in the NPP School. I pick you as you are in PST the same as me. Thanks, Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 17:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The4lines, sure thing, I'll set things up for you in a bit. In the meantime, here are some helpful scripts and gadgets for NPP work that you should install if you haven't already:
  • If you haven't installed it yet, you should definitely set up WP:TWINKLE. If you already have Twinkle installed, please go to Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences and enable "Keep a log in userspace of all CSD nominations" and " Keep a log in userspace of all PROD nominations". This will allow you, me, and other editors to view your track record with these two deletion protocols (AfDs can be checked here).
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js, which adds a link to the new page queue next to the Sandbox and Preferences links at the top of your UI
  • User:Primefac/revdel.js, which adds an interface for requesting copyright revision deletions in the More tab next to page history
Cool thanks, I’m going in to a class so I see you in a bit. Thanks, Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 17:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
The4lines, no rush, but whenever you're ready to begin, I've posted the first questions at User:Rosguill/The4lines NPPSCHOOL. signed, Rosguill talk 17:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Adopt-a-user

Hi Rosguill,

I came across the Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user project, and was very happy to discover that a mentorship project did exist.

There are some questions I have (often) and A LOT of a need for independent ״outside״ review on my contributions. As Daniel Kahneman once noted, intuition is the result of multiple cycles of action and feedback (not directly quoted). Having a tier 1 guide and mentor will (hopefully some day) make me a tier 1 contributor myself.

In terms of what I enjoy doing on Wikipedia - I LOVE emptying backlogs, particularly complex and complicated ones - promotional content, lack of citations etc. Also, I sometimes dabble in writing - if I come across anything noteworthy, I try to make it into an article or section. I already accumulated some experience and have authored a bit and would appreciate if you had a look. Both In terms of my application for adoption and in general.

Should I accepted, I humbly guarantee I will ALWAYS google and rtfm before asking, and make you proud in the end. Pratat (talk) 12:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Pratat, what sorts of articles/backlogs are you particularly looking for assistance with? And what kind of guidance were you hoping to receive? signed, Rosguill talk 18:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill Thank you for your reply! So far, what I found most interesting are fixing promotional articles, as these require both copy-edit, grammar corrections (often), general cleaning up, enhancing and/or finding sources, noticing the implication of every word and term used and thinking long and hard on whether the article adheres to Wikipedia policies. I had some legal training and doing these fixes warms up the thought muscles associated with that training. In addition, it does give a jolt of pleasure to fix an article which was marked for fixing a year, two, three ago and emptying the backlog on which it is. I mostly like Category:All articles with a promotional tone and Category:Wikipedia introduction cleanup. Sometimes, when time is limited I do lighter fixes - wikilinks, additional citations etc. As for the guidance - ideally, I would do corrections and improvements to an article (significant ones, not adding wikilinks or coordinates...), report to you on having it done, and receive feedback whether or not I did what needed to be done, what part of it, what policies should I have read more carefully etc, what else needs to be done etc. In addition, I might ask some other questions as well - "where should I do XXX", but these will not be significant or take much of your time. Thank you, Pratat (talk) 07:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Pratat, I'd be happy to provide that sort of support. Given that you mentioned both an interest in clearing backlogs and a legal background, would you be interested in getting involved in new pages patrol? signed, Rosguill talk 07:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, It would be my utmost pleasure! Pratat (talk) 08:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Pratat, great to hear. Now, depending on how well you think you understand notability guidelines and other procedures relevant to NPP, there's two ways to proceed from here. If you think that you understand the relevant guidelines fairly well, then I can confer the permissions for a trial period, and you can start reviewing articles while checking in with me periodically, similar to how you were proposing going about copyediting. Alternatively, if you think you might need to spend some time studying and practicing the relevant material, I can also teach you a more formal course through the WP:NPPSCHOOL, which is a fairly thorough series of lessons in the various aspects of new page reviewing. The NPPSCHOOL curriculum takes about a month to get through if you prioritize working on it (which you are not required or necessarily expected to do), although it depends a bit on what areas you actually need to work on (e.g. if you have no issues with say, identifying original research, we can run through that module fairly quickly). Let me know what you think sounds better. signed, Rosguill talk 17:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, I feel I do need to know much more and should start at WP:NPP and all the other essential and recommended reading suggested there. Pratat (talk) 08:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Pratat, ok once you've made it through that reading let me know how you want to proceed. signed, Rosguill talk 17:22, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

ANI

Hi Rosguill, just a heads-up really. I don't disagree that that discussion was not leading anywhere productive, but I think that WP:CBAN explicitly prohibits closing a community ban discussion before 24 hours have elapsed. Not sure what benefit there would be to reopening it, so I'm not going to revert your close, but that close might be challenged. Let me know if you think I'm mistaken about this. GirthSummit (blether) 08:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit thanks for the heads up, I wasn't aware of that rule but stand by my decision to close given the state of the discussion at the time. signed, Rosguill talk 17:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill, no worries. As I said, I don't have a problem with the call, and it doesn't look like anyone else does - just something to be aware of. GirthSummit (blether) 18:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Your comments on my Francesco Ferramosca page

Francesco Ferramosca was famous in South Africa over 100 years ago, so you can imagine that getting articles, references, citations is not easy. I have been to the British Library many times to look through old magazines and journals, and made copies of the relevant pages with their references. I also have a old family scrapbook containing lots of information and cuttings. I am not sure what particular reference(s) you are concerned about, but please let me know and I will try to add more information. I suspect you looked at the links where I could find an online link, these refer to places he played, in early Johannesburg. If you looked at the 3 references numbered 1,3 and 4 (which I have copies of, but no online link), you would see him mentioned many times. Perhaps you could explain to me how to reference these journals for which I have copies? Can I load them into say Flickr and then reference that link here? Acferrad (talk) 15:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Acferrad, either email me a scan of the sources using the "Email this user" option in the sidebar of this page, or transcribe some relevant quotes in a section on Draft talk:Francesco Ferramosca. Provided that the content you transcribe isn't something totally absurd, I'll be willing to take you at your word that it's what's in the source. signed, Rosguill talk 17:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill sure will do... if I can find the "email this user" link. I cannot see it, can you help? Acferrad (talk) 17:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Acferrad, it should be in the far-left sidebar of this page, under the Wikipedia logo, under the subheader "Tools". You may have an easier time finding it by just pressing ctrl-F (on Windows, cmd-F on Mac) to search for the text in the page. signed, Rosguill talk 17:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill yes I used ctrl-F to look for it, but nothing. All that is under Tools is: What links here / Related changes / User contributions / Logs / Mute preferences / View user groups / Upload file / Special pages / Permanent link / Page information. Acferrad (talk) 17:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill I found it, I didn't have my email address set up! Acferrad (talk) 17:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Rosguill I sent them via email (as links as I couldn't see how to attach files), what happens now? Acferrad (talk) 18:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Acferrad, I'll review them in a bit and get back to you. If it's enough to establish notability, I'll go ahead and move the article back to mainspace. Otherwise, I'll leave additional comments on the article's talk page and ping you to it. signed, Rosguill talk 18:58, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

List of Sword Art Online: Alicization -- Deletion of episode list page

Re: List_of_Sword_Art_Online:_Alicization_episodes
Where is the discussion / request for moving this page?
There was a substantial amount of summary information that was not ported over back to the general series page.
--GimmeChoco44 (talk) 07:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

GimmeChoco44, it was made through a G6 deletion request of a redirect from Sword Art Online: Alicization to List of Sword Art Online: Alicization episodes. There wasn't anything in that page's history other than redirects, so I'm not sure what this additional content you're referring to is. signed, Rosguill talk 17:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. The List of Episodes had plot summaries for each of the episodes, to which I contributed several times as a copy editor. Now that the List has been redirected to the main series page, there are no descriptions for those episodes.
Several other anime series have a similar structure, including the previous arcs of the Sword Art Online series. I'm surprised by this redirect request and the G6 criteria does not seem to match the actual content that was removed. Since I can't find any documentation on this case, would I be justified in reverting the move to (a) initiate a Talk discussion and/or (b) identify a relevant point in the page's revision history leading up to the redirect? --GimmeChoco44 (talk) 19:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
GimmeChoco44 This is all rather confusing. The article currently at Sword Art Online: Alicization is the same article that was at List of Sword Art Online: Alicization episodes; I didn't convert the prior to a redirect so much as move it to the current location and leave a redirect behind. Any removal of content would be in the page's history. Looking at the page more carefully, it looks like the short summaries you contributed are still in the article's source code, but aren't displaying for some reason. Even weirder, old revisions don't seem to display the summaries correctly either, despite having edit summaries that suggest that people were actively working on the article and didn't notice anything out of the ordinary. I note that many of the old revisions when rendered today appear to use templates that are currently redlinked. My guess is that somewhere along the line, an in-use template was removed, and the attempt to move the content to a new template included syntax errors which broke rendering for the summaries. I don't think that the page move had anything to do with it, however. signed, Rosguill talk 19:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I didn't think to check the source code -- yes, it appears that the summary data is intact, but there is an error in table formatting that is preventing the text form being displayed. I'll bring it up on that page's Talk section to see if we can get someone with table expertise to help us out.-- GimmeChoco44 (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Notability of Virgin Radio spin-off stations

Hello! I am slightly puzzled as to how you have concluded that articles on Virgin Radio Anthems and Virgin Radio Chilled do not meet WP:GNG, but seemingly articles on the third spin-off, Virgin Radio Groove, (and its long-defunct namesake, Virgin Radio Groove (2000)) do? My edits on this series of articles stem from me attempting to clean-up the information in Wikidata on these topics: (and, obviously, one WP article cannot link to multiple WD entries). DrFrench (talk) 08:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

DrFrench, the answer is that I didn't conclude that. I came across Virgin Radio Anthems and Virgin Radio Chilled in the new pages queue. Virgin Radio Groove appears to have existed as an article for a much longer time, and predates the existence of the new page patrol so it has never been formally reviewed. Virgin Radio Groove (2000) appears to be a brand new article that you created from scratch (as opposed to converting an existing redirect) so it's still in the new pages queue and hasn't been reviewed yet.
As for the implicit question of whether lining up English Wikipedia articles to Wikidata entries supersedes the question of if the subject meets WP:GNG conventionally, I don't have a good answer for that. I can see the benefit of reflecting the structure of Wikidata, but we're also generally not supposed to dictate Wikipedia content on the basis of the existence of content on other wikimedia projects. signed, Rosguill talk 17:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
The Virgin Radio Groove article was a bit of a mess, with information relaing to both iterations of the brand. As the Virgin Radio Groove name seems most appropriate to use for an article for the current iteration, it seemed best to split-out the infomation relating to the previous iteration into a new article. But thanks for the info and your thoughts. DrFrench (talk) 17:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Request

Hi! English wikipedia Please allow me to IP block exemption and Confirmed users. trest me(Me global IP block exemption There are teams But not working I want to contribute to the English wiki Please give me this right) I use a VPN to connect to sites Tor,vpn or anonymous proxy abroad, as I do not want to block my account .Thank you 103.25.250.242 (talk) 03:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

To be honest I'm not terribly with the policy covering this area, but from reading WP:IPECPROXY it looks like enabling proxy editing is something that we only grant to editors with an established track record on a registered account. I'm afraid there isn't much I can do to help. signed, Rosguill talk 03:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Notability of Virgin Radio spin-off stations

Hello! I am slightly puzzled as to how you have concluded that articles on Virgin Radio Anthems and Virgin Radio Chilled do not meet WP:GNG, but seemingly articles on the third spin-off, Virgin Radio Groove, (and its long-defunct namesake, Virgin Radio Groove (2000)) do? My edits on this series of articles stem from me attempting to clean-up the information in Wikidata on these topics: (and, obviously, one WP article cannot link to multiple WD entries). DrFrench (talk) 08:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

DrFrench, the answer is that I didn't conclude that. I came across Virgin Radio Anthems and Virgin Radio Chilled in the new pages queue. Virgin Radio Groove appears to have existed as an article for a much longer time, and predates the existence of the new page patrol so it has never been formally reviewed. Virgin Radio Groove (2000) appears to be a brand new article that you created from scratch (as opposed to converting an existing redirect) so it's still in the new pages queue and hasn't been reviewed yet.
As for the implicit question of whether lining up English Wikipedia articles to Wikidata entries supersedes the question of if the subject meets WP:GNG conventionally, I don't have a good answer for that. I can see the benefit of reflecting the structure of Wikidata, but we're also generally not supposed to dictate Wikipedia content on the basis of the existence of content on other wikimedia projects. signed, Rosguill talk 17:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
The Virgin Radio Groove article was a bit of a mess, with information relaing to both iterations of the brand. As the Virgin Radio Groove name seems most appropriate to use for an article for the current iteration, it seemed best to split-out the infomation relating to the previous iteration into a new article. But thanks for the info and your thoughts. DrFrench (talk) 17:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Request

Hi! English wikipedia Please allow me to IP block exemption and Confirmed users. trest me(Me global IP block exemption There are teams But not working I want to contribute to the English wiki Please give me this right) I use a VPN to connect to sites Tor,vpn or anonymous proxy abroad, as I do not want to block my account .Thank you 103.25.250.242 (talk) 03:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

To be honest I'm not terribly with the policy covering this area, but from reading WP:IPECPROXY it looks like enabling proxy editing is something that we only grant to editors with an established track record on a registered account. I'm afraid there isn't much I can do to help. signed, Rosguill talk 03:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Reviewing my pages. BoldLuis (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Redirection of "Mia Kim" page is error

The relevant secondary coverage covers Mia Kim as a currently performing solo performer who is merely correctly identifying herself as also being one of The Kim Sisters; it is not at all ‘in the context of The Kim Sisters’. Unlike Mia Kim, Sue Kim in fact has no notability outside The Kim Sisters and has never been a solo performer, yet you do not redirect Sue Kim’s page? Wthtvofdm (talk) 23:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Wthtvofdm, I didn't see anything when reviewing the provided sources, but maybe I missed something. Could you identify which source you think has significant secondary coverage outside of the context of the Kim Sisters? As for why I redirected one article or not the other, I was just patrolling the New pages feed and came across Mia Kim. I was not aware that Sook-ja Kim existed, and have now redirected that article as well after merging relevant content to The Kim Sisters. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, and as such guidelines are not always enforced consistently due to a lack of reviewers. That inconsistency in itself, however, is not a justification for the creation of further content that goes against our guidelines. For more information, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. signed, Rosguill talk 23:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

DRN Volunteer Roll Call - Action Required

There has been no roll call since November 2017 so with that said, it is time to clean up the volunteer list. Please go to the Roll Call list and follow the instructions. If no response is received by May 30, 2020, it will be assumed that you no longer wish to participate and you will be removed as a DRN volunteer. Thank you for your attention to this and for helping Wikipedians in their dispute processes.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up at 12:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

A little help needed

Hi Rosguill. I hope you remember me - edit warring, "oblast", and so on. Yesterday I stated clearly: I'm backing off. They wanted "oblast", so be it. Today though I had another unpleasant encounter with user JzG - I said multiple times I'm done with it and the guy again starts with commenting my behavior and attitude ("problematic user", some mumbo-jumbo on blocking me). He/she can comment my behavior whilst I cannot point out that I'm not doing anything to "oblast" thing or Kaliningrad and, obviously, he/she must've missed that out? What's that suppose to be? Where's the diversity of opinions and equality? Pumped ego of a person with administrative rights telling me to yield because he/she's an admin? Is that the real Wikipedia from insider's point of view? If so, I will consider to back off completely, because this is sick. Tell me what you think, please. You seem to be a reasonable person basing on our constructive conversation. Maybe I don't fit Wikipedia. One of the science's principles is to challenge one's opinion. I dare to do that with effects - you can see for yourself... TIA. Programmer Physicist (talk) 13:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Programmer Physicist Assuming you're talking about the further edits to Talk:Baltic Sea, I think that they were probably unaware of the discussion we had at 3RR, weren't sure whether you were actually going to make good on your promise to let the issue rest, and felt like they needed to issue a warning. At this point, if you just let the matter drop and stop replying to their edits I think everyone will be able to move on. signed, Rosguill talk 17:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for reviewing and tagging the many redirects I've been creating lately. A presumably tedious and mostly thankless task, but one that absolutely needs to be done. CJK09 (talk) 21:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

CJK09, for being such a thankless task, I end up getting thanked a surprising amount. signed, Rosguill talk 21:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rosguill/Archive_13&oldid=1143273811"