User talk:Srich32977/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15 ← Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 → Archive 25

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
  • Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

  • Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
  • The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

What's not accurate?

[1] WP:OWN? WP:IDONTLIKEIT? BRD requires a "D." Toddst1 (talk) 23:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

Administrator changes

added Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
removed Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Page number range

With regards to this edit, By all means replace a dash with an ndash, but please do not remove full page numbers in a page number range. Just as with date ranges Wikipedia does not need to save the space that using the full page takes up. -- PBS (talk) 13:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

cite isbn parameter

I noticed you added id={{ISBN|978-1400067602}} to {{cite book}}s in the David Brooks article with this edit. Is there a reason you prefer this to the the attribute isbn=978-1400067602? I actually ended up replacing the citations in question completely, so it's a moot point for that article, but I'm wondering for future reference. Sondra.kinsey (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2017 (UTC) @Sondra.kinsey: Hello. Take a second look and you'll see the templates were cite web and cite book. Since I was doing the edits on my iphone, using id= ISBN was the easiest way to assure that the ISBNs rendered. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Hatnote

With this edit at List of Confederate monuments and memorials, you added a link to Camp White Sulphur Springs Confederate Cemetery. Why? Magnolia677 (talk) 01:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Take a look at the refs. Memorials are pictured and mentioned. – S. Rich (talk) 02:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
@Magnolia677: Come on, hatnotes don't need sources. The target article has refs which mention memorials. – S. Rich (talk) 02:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Mass delete at List of Confederate monuments and memorials

With this edit you removed a number of entries at List of Confederate monuments and memorials with the edit summary "remove mentions of graves of soldiers (per general attitude on talk page) as these are memorials to the individuals, not necessarily to the CSA)". Unfortunately, not all of what you removed were graves. For example, at Alton, Illinois, you removed the entry for the Confederate Cemetery and Memorial. This is the memorial. It's clearly not a grave. You also removed this image, which had the caption "Confederate Monument, Little Rock National Cemetery", as well as a text entry for it. I have only glanced at your edit, but suspect there will be more monuments (not graves) that were removed. Would you be prepared to revisit your edit and restore content which should not have been removed? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: Nice photo of the obelisk. When there's 640 buried at at one location a large monument is appropriate, and it really is a marking for the unknown soldiers buried there. It does not look like a memorial to the CSA or Confederacy. I suspect the same is true for the NPS image/monument -- after all, it is in a cemetery. Given how political the topic is, I hope we can just omit these burial sites from the listing. If we don't then what it the stopping point? Why not include the grave markers/memorials for each of the soldiers we can find in a cemetery? And given that vandals have invaded cemeteries to damage the "evil" monuments to the dead, wouldn't keeping out such monuments help a little in discouraging such mischief? (BTW, I once visited a memorial to the German soldiers who had died during the WWII Western Desert Campaign. It is a large walk-in structure with vaults that hold the remains of 20,000 soldiers.) – S. Rich (talk) 00:37, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about this at List of Confederate monuments and memorials. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:44, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

List_of_monuments_and_memorials_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America

Hi there,

Thanks for all your hard work on the above, mentioned article. I've had another go at editing it and because my reasons went into rather more depth than the edit summary allowed I've left some notes about the edit on the talk page. I appreciate your comments that the word "public sponsor" neglects and confuses the fact that some of the monuments might have been paid for privately. I've had another go at changing the word with the intent of using the source to clarify the text in the article without using potentially confusing terminology. Please check it and comment if necessary. Many thanks again. Edaham (talk) 06:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of my note

I'll take your snarky deletion of my note as refusal to discuss. You should not be deleting entire sections and creating notes. Legacypac (talk) 01:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

  • Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
  • Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Islamosecularism

Dear Mr. Rich,

I read your note on my talk page /User_talk:Ahassan01. Recently I read the rules of Wikipedia regarding verification and reliable sources. I respect these rules and I will follow them. To do that, I am planing to convert my Islamosecularism blog to a conference paper that can be published in good conference. After the paper is published, it will be easy to add it to Wikipedia because at that time, it will be well-established topic, that have reliable reference (the proceedings of the conference). Finally, the topic of my PhD does not include islamosecularism.

Best Regards, ali hassan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahassan01 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ahassan01: Thank you. Please let me know when it is is published. To avoid problems with WP:SELFCITE it is often best to have another editor make the contributions. – S. Rich (talk) 03:56, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

Administrator changes

added Nakon • Scott
removed Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
  • Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
  • In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

  • Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

  • On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
  • Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about the trouble with the Dam failure article, some of the new sites have changed their headlines since I posted the references.Pastorma (talk) 23:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Pastorma: Got it. – S. Rich (talk) 01:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

added Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem
removed Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
  • A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of my note

I'll take your snarky deletion of my note as refusal to discuss. You should not be deleting entire sections and creating notes. Legacypac (talk) 01:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Quite the contrary. I've been providing edit summaries and talk page comments at every stage. Also, I'm amazed that some editors fail to address the Very Long problem and even removed Very Long tag that I posted on the article. When editors suggest that I be banned from an article, I think they are exhibiting WP:OWNBEHAVIOR issues – and I prefer that they keep their comments off of my talk page. – S. Rich (talk) 01:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
@Legacypac: Your comments about my edits being disruptive are not appreciated or supported. E.g., "several editors" have not described them as such. Please WP:AGF and WP:NPA in your talk page comments. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

added Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93
removed Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Help needed

Hello.

Would you be willing to help me out by checking through the following list of statistics and other references, and inserting the ones that are appropriate and sufficiently reliable into related Wikipedia pages?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_A/Important_Fact_Links

I am kept extremely busy constantly managing one of the world's most popular entertainment wikis, so I regrettably do not have the time to do so, and am also rather inexperienced with editing articles covering more serious subjects.

I would really appreciate the help. David A (talk) 16:23, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

@David A: Sorry. There is much to much in the list to review. I would not know where to begin. Best wishes on your endeavor. – S. Rich (talk) 03:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks anyway. There is a lot of important information there however. David A (talk) 04:17, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Ref

This ref [2] definitely supports? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:28, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. I've been on the mobile app and misread the citation. Back on the desktop where I can/do review the mobile edits. – S. Rich (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

A cleanup you did failed

See here, which messed up formatting and notes. I just found an IP removing one mess (an IP who is trying to make changes in grammar some of which change the meaning entirely). Doug Weller talk 10:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Always good to learn something new. The [[bracketed]] "citations" previously rerouted to the very same article. My edit to them was via AutoEd, which should know better. But now, following your latest edit, we still see the same strange non-footnote text. E.g., it renders "immediately.[[Atahualpa#cite note-FOOTNOTERostworowski1999{{{c}}}174-175-43|43]][3]" I'll leave it to you for a final fix as the technical aspects of this footnoting style are beyond me. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 18:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll ask at the help desk, it's beyond me also. Doug Weller talk 19:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

added Joe Roe
readded JzG
removed Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
  • Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

  • If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

  • A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
  • Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
  • The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Prince

Hello. I do not fully understand your question about Bireley? [3] You mean the book about the "anti" Machiavellians in the Counter Reformation? I have a copy, but I am not sure what to look for. Please explain.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 22:07, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Andrew Lancaster: Bireley is cited at the end of the paragraph, referencing page 14. Is he the source for all of the info in the paragraph? If so, then you might add an editor's note that says he translated "De Principatibus" as such and such. – S. Rich (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Birely is most important for the last sentence, the least well-known fact in that paragraph, but it also potentially a source for the second last sentence if needed. (The paragraph is an intro paragraph with basic information that will appear in almost any book on the subject.) I can see your tag is on the second sentence. Not sure why, but in any case I will put a source there.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 22:27, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Professional Association of Diving Instructors

The user behind the TotalConversionMarketing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) account is still a registered Wikipedia editor. They renamed to H20below (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and their contributions to the Professional Association of Diving Instructors article can be seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Professional_Association_of_Diving_Instructors&offset=20140703&action=history . It is true that the account hasn't edited since 2014.

A discussion about their edits on the talk page is in the second part of the section Talk:Professional Association of Diving Instructors #Criticism section removal, and at their talk page User talk:H20below. The criticism section has been the subject of several discussions as you can see from the talk page.

Nevertheless, the article is pretty stable now, and I won't contest your removal of the COI tag. --RexxS (talk) 13:46, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@RexxS: when you see a COI contributor the best solution is to notify them about COI policies and add a {{connected contributor}} notice to the article talk page. That way we avoid needless indexing of the COI issues. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
I think you'll find that {{connected contributor}} is only for "when dealing with an editor who has an actual conflict of interest, not merely a potential conflict of interest." It's not always apparent that such a condition exists, so I'd urge caution in its use. The {{COI}} tag is aimed at readers, as well as editors, and is used "to alert readers that the article may be biased by a conflict of interest, and to request help with an article that is biased or has other serious problems as a direct result of the editing done by the subject of the article or by a person with a close connection to the subject". Neither of them is a substitute for explaining our COI policies to an editor who may have some conflict of interest. --RexxS (talk) 19:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate the thank you for unlinking English. Unfortunately, I'm getting beat up for it by those who think everything needs a link. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

added Muboshgu
readded Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
removed None

Bureaucrat changes

readded Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Did you get my ping

At Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Got the ping. I'm not sure what the issue is. Is there concern about the sanctions notice (which I posted years ago)? I do see I added "ae" to it; perhaps because von Mises is listed as Morgenstern's academic advisor. (But I can't remember the exact rationale.) In any case, SPECIFICO provided RS for the Austrian School connection. – S. Rich (talk) 20:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
It says “who edit pages related to , including this article.” The person asking wants to know, I presume, related to what? Doug Weller talk 20:34, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
At one point the topic was subject to sanctions: Here. But the regime is now obsolete. The solution is to remove the template.  Done. – S. Rich (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Randal Quarles' Term

His term expires January 31, 2018[1] as he was nominated to fill the unexpired term of Jeremy C. Stein. He has been renominated to fill the term expiring January 31, 2032[2] for a new 14-year term. Your edit to Template:Federal Reserve Governors is therefore incorrect and I have reverted it. – JocularJellyfish TalkContribs 23:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.congress.gov/nomination/115th-congress/734
  2. ^ https://www.congress.gov/nomination/115th-congress/1354

@JocularJellyfish: I miscalculated the end of Governor term as Jan 31, 2031. But you've reverted to the original incorrect date. Please double-check and change to 2032. – S. Rich (talk) 00:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Srich32977: you've misunderstood. As of now, Quarles has only been confirmed to the remainder of the term ending January 31, 2018. The new term has not been confirmed yet so as of now, if the Senate does not act on his nomination he will leave the Fed at the end of this month. Once he is confirmed again the term expiration date can be changed to 2032. – JocularJellyfish TalkContribs 00:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Now I understand. – S. Rich (talk) 00:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Alert

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

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

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

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 13:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

"Dead" links

Please don't remove "dead" links as they can be recovered from archival sources. See [4] for an example. General Ization Talk 03:39, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Spacing within the infobox disease template

Can you please not alter the spacing in this template as you did here?[5]

Many thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you ...

Call of the Wild
Precious six years

... for improving article quality in January 2018! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Srich32977, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!
The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
  • We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

  • We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
  • Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Bibliography Inclusions

Hi Srich32977, I am roseoilpicnic, and I just revised the wikipedia article for The Heartland Institute. I spent quite a lot of time creating an up-to-date Bibliography and had posted it. Within a space of ten minutes, a message from your handle had removed the list. Your note mentions a lack of relevance and something about salad. I do not understand. Please explain. Roseoilpicnic (talk) 23:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)roseoilpicnic 2/16/2018

Follow-on note, Perhaps you ran across the unusual, but actual, title of "Don't Poop in my Salad". That book has been listed under the "Books" category of the article for quite some time. Please do reinstate the Bibliography. The citations are in order. Roseoilpicnic (talk) 01:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)roseoilpicnic2/16/2018

@Roseoilpicnic: It wasn't me, but I agree with the removal. – S. Rich (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Use of templates within citation templates

In this edit where {{snd}} was added to the |title= of a {{cite web}} - this is disallowed as it breaks things. See the top of the {{snd}} where it says "STOP! Don't add this to citation templates" (-: In general, it's not a good idea to add templates within a citation template. -- GreenC 15:41, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

@GreenC: Thanks. I didn't know. Happy to learn something new! – S. Rich (talk) 18:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

endash/emdash at Stoneman Douglas

Re: [6][7][8]

Hello. First, I appreciate not having "discussions" via re-reverts and edit summaries.
Your rationale is not entirely clear to me, although I get that you don't like unspaced emdash. There is no basis in my experience for a statement that spaced endash is "used elsewhere - consistently", if that's what you meant. While it's currently true that "no other unspaced eMdashs are in the article", it's also true that there were no spaced endashes in the article's prose. MOS says you can use either provided you use it consistently within the article, and it's not talking about things like date and time ranges, which always use spaced endash. To my mind, all this means that the one use of unspaced emdash should be left alone. ―Mandruss ☎ 11:40, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mandruss: per MOS:DASH "In all these cases [e.g. sentence punctuation], use either unspaced em dashes or spaced en dashes, with consistency in any one article:" – S. Rich (talk) 18:25, 1 March 2018 (UTC) The article now has 2 emdashes (improperly spaced) and several other properly spaced endashes. Not consistent, and not in keeping with the MOS. 18:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

added Lourdes†
removed AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

RfA

Would you be interested in a RfA nom? You seem to be a great candidate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 18:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail
Hello, Srich32977. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.L293D (☎ • ✎) 16:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@L293D: Thanks for the invite. I've toyed with the idea before and other fine editors have encouraged me as well. At this stage, though, I'll defer. The RfA can be a bothersome process. At the moment I do not want the aggravation. I'll let you know when I'm ready. Best regards. – S. Rich (talk) 02:41, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Srich32977/Archive_20&oldid=1090605634"