This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ezlev. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Hatchens, and I thank you for your contributions.
I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started, Andreas Malm, for deletion, because there's already a page about that topic at Draft:Andreas_Malm. Please don't be discouraged; we appreciate your effort in creating new articles. To avoid this in the future, consider using the search function to find pages that already cover what you want to write about.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.
For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Hatchens}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Inexpiable, I agree that there's a possibility that Diamond is a sockpuppet, or at least a single-purpose account, and Diamond's latest edits and edit summaries are certainly disruptive. Still, I think it might be best to leave things be for the moment, as the article still provides an accurate view of things and this issue might just fade away if it's given time to do so. I think the best long-term course of action if specific content continues to prove controversial would be an RfC. In the short-term, relax for a while - you definitely deserve it after all your work on that article. warmly, ezlev.talk07:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
SK2242, I definitely understand the concern, but the article itself (while not devoid of issues) made it all the way through the reviewing workflow when I took a look at it. Since Stevemalya had already been duly blocked and the article seemed suitable, I wasn't sure what grounds there would be to decline the submission. That said, I'm new to AfC and would be grateful for any additional tips you can offer for situations like that one. warmly, ezlev.talk01:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Kj cheetham, thank you for catching that! Not sure what went wrong there, but in the future I'll try to double-check things like that manually after I use the script. warmly, ezlev.talk18:04, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Completion rates for comments made with the Reply tool and full-page wikitext editing. Details and limitations are in this report.
The Reply tool is available at most other Wikipedias.
The Reply tool has been deployed as an opt-out preference to all editors at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
It is also available as a Beta Feature at almost all Wikipedias except for the English, Russian, and German-language Wikipedias. If it is not available at your wiki, you can request it by following these simple instructions.
Research notes:
As of January 2021, more than 3,500 editors have used the Reply tool to post about 70,000 comments.
There is preliminary data from the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedia on the Reply tool. Junior Contributors who use the Reply tool are more likely to publish the comments that they start writing than those who use full-page wikitext editing.[1]
The Editing and Parsing teams have significantly reduced the number of edits that affect other parts of the page. About 0.3% of edits did this during the last month.[2] Some of the remaining changes are automatic corrections for Special:LintErrors.
A large A/B test will start soon.[3] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.
During Talk pages consultation 2019, editors said that it should be easier to know about new activity in conversations they are interested in. The Notifications project is just beginning. What would help you become aware of new comments? What's working with the current system? Which pages at your wiki should the team look at? Please post your advice at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Global Online Academy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Onel5969TT me12:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Hello Ezlev. I had recently modified the Geneva Consensus Declaration page. And you undid my edits. The reason I made those changes was to remove all references to opinion or irrelevant facts that only serve to influence the reader's opinion. I believe Wikipedia should be factual only.
For example "most of the signatories are illiberal, authoritarian, or autocratic governments which predominantly subscribe to hard-line religious viewpoints". This does not describe the Geneva Consensus Declaration but only serves to paint the signatories in a bad light. This is an attempt to influence the reader.
It goes on to say "some of their leaders have been accused of human rights violations". Again, this does not help the reader understand what the Geneva Consensus Declaration is all about and besides that, an accusation is not proof. I could literally accuse any country in the world of anything I want and make the same statement that "this country has been accused of X". It means nothing and again is only included in an attempt to influence the reader's opinion of the Declaration. That kind of propaganda has no place on Wikipedia.
"most of the countries did not appear to take them seriously" is not only propaganda, but entirely without evidence. If you have to use the word "appear" then you know you're only stating an opinion.
"Human rights activists described the declaration as an international attack on women, gender, and sexuality". How a specific group describes the Declaration is again irrelevant to the declaration itself, as any declaration is going to have its detractors and enemies. If you want to point out groups that criticise the declaration then you should at least also point out groups that support the declaration and give both groups equal space, otherwise again it is nothing more than an attempt to influence the reader.
"Some of the signatories may have been motivated by a desire to undermine established international institutions" is a blatant opinion statement without any evidence to back up or prove their motivation. Why is speculation about the reasons for signing a declaration on this page? Is Wikipedia a place for speculation and opinion?
Please remove all references to opinion, speculation and propaganda. This is not the place to promote your own ideological views, or to attack the ideological views of others. This is a place to present facts for the benefit of all. Wikipedia started out as a fact based information source, as an encyclopedia should be, but has since been overrun with opinions, speculation and biased attacks and that's a shame because that's not what this place was meant to be. Please, if you're an editor of Wikipedia, then you must consider yourself a non-biased journalist presenting only the facts with the only goal of informing the readers, not influencing them. Consider yourself an impartial observer looking from some distance away, not personally involved, and not personally caring how the reader responds to the information you provide as you're only providing the facts, like how a robot would. That is how the greatest historians recorded history, and that's how we should be recording today.
This may seem like a strange comparison but I'm reminded of how we are trained to observe children in child care. When we do observations of children at play we write down only what we see, not what we assume or think. For example, if Johnny picks up a block, frowns and throws it I would say "Johnny picked up the block, frowned and threw the block" not "Johnny picked up the block and appeared to be angry so he threw it". The first statement is simple facts, the second statement inserts my interpretation of the facts. Wikipedia should be only a statement of facts, not our interpretation of those facts.
All we have to do is explain what the Consensus states, who signed it and when and then the readers can make up their own minds on whether or not they agree with it. We don't need to encourage them one way or the other on how to think. That's insulting to the reader and a disservice to the integrity of this site.
I hope I've made clear to you why I removed those parts of the page, and I hope you agree that Wikipedia articles should be factual only for the subject in question and not be written in such a way as to influence the reader's opinions by inserting our own biases, interpretations of facts, opinions or propaganda, or even to reference the one-sided opinions or propaganda of others as they relate to the subject.
JackGunn, I made that revert solely because your edit removed sourced content without a full explanation for doing so. That raised red flags for me because disruptive editors often use edit summaries like "removed opinion" for edits that are actually removing well-sourced content. Upon seeing that your edit had removed content which was supported with citations to reliable sources, I made the revert; I had no other motivation for doing so. I apologize for any confusion or inconvenience my edit caused. I fully agree that non-neutrality is an issue on Wikipedia, and I'm happy that you've chosen to create an account and work to make this platform better.
A quick note: In your message above, you said that if you're an editor of Wikipedia, then you must consider yourself a non-biased journalist presenting only the facts with the only goal of informing the readers, not influencing them. I want to make sure you're aware of the wording and meaning of Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, WP:NPOV. This policy makes clear that articles are expected not just to present the facts but also, as you put it, the one-sided opinions or propaganda of others as they relate to the subject if those opinions are relevant and meet certain other policies. Rather than arguing for the removal of any non-objective content, I encourage you to focus on making sure that non-objective content meets these other Wikipedia policies such as due weight, no original research, and attribution.
As for the Geneva Consensus Declaration article, I think I'm going to place an issue tag and maybe do some work on it when I get a chance. Thanks for taking the time to leave me a message! I've also dropped a welcome template on your talk page with some more links you might find useful. warmly, ezlev.talk22:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Just a reminder that whenever you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD, etc.), you need to post a notice on the page creator's talk page. If you use Twinkle, the program does this automatically for you once you set up your Preferences so I encourage you to try it out. Thanks. LizRead!Talk!07:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Liz, thanks for the reminder! I do use Twinkle, and I know it placed an automatic notification for a CSD tag back on Feb 1, but evidently not for the one from today. Time to poke around the preferences for a little while, I guess. Again, thank you for bringing it to my attention! warmly, ezlev.talk07:46, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Liz, update to my reply above: based on the Twinkle preferences, it looks like notifications for a WP:G6 tag are only automatic when the Db-copypaste template is used as opposed to the generic Db-g6 template with rationale. It's probably because there's no templated notice like Db-copypaste-notice for the generic Db-g6, right? That'll be a tricky quirk to remember, but I'll try my best in the future! warmly, ezlev.talk07:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
Hey! I got your review message, thank you for that. I’m still getting used to working this site. Please can you give me advice on how to improve as I already think I’ve done a decent job with detail, facts and not being to vague. Please can you help in assisting me. Ashcroft18 (talk) 19:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Ashcroft18, thanks for asking! The main reason I declined the submission of Draft:Kameelion was its use of "peacock terms," which promote the subject without adding encyclopedic content to the article. One example from near the beginning of the article is burst on to the music scene, which doesn't fit the encyclopedic tone we use on Wikipedia. However, another area that needs work is the references. Every claim needs to be supported by a reliable source, which doesn't include social media platforms like Twitter/Facebook/Youtube or iMDB.
I do think Kameelion is notable and should have an article on Wikipedia, and this draft is almost there. Adding better sources and/or removing unsourced content will make a huge improvement, and giving the article a neutral point of view will be important as well. Let me know if you have any other questions! warmly, ezlev.talk21:09, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Hey! Thanks for getting back to me and being so helpful! I will try and edit some of the text then and change some wording. I will try and sort out the reference issues. Sometimes, the only links to show it was truthful, was via YouTube or Twitter etc. I am going to work on it today. I keep reading it over and over, and I can't seem to find anymore "peacock terms", if you can try and point others out so I could rectify; that would really help me. I've tried to be as neutral and formal as possible, but I am just starting out.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tillie Kottmann, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomberg. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
PseudonymhelpU2, thanks for asking! I reverted that edit because it was synthesis, which is what it's called when someone combines material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. In this case, the edit took something which was not mentioned in the sources related to Irreversible Damage but was mentioned in sources related to Jack Turban, and combined it with the source that was in the article (Jack Turban's criticism of Irreversible Damage) to imply certain things about how credible that criticism is. That isn't really done on Wikipedia, because in addition to violating the part about synthesis in the policy no original research, it also usually doesn't adhere to a neutral point of view. I hope this is helpful - I'll ping SreySros here, who reverted your edit before I did, so she can tell us if I missed anything (if she wants). And if you've got any more questions, feel free to ask them here! ezlev.talk20:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
PseudonymhelpU2, Ezlev pretty much summed up why I reverted your original edit. I apologize if my edit summary ("SYNTH, not a RS") was too short to be helpful. Generally if you see people using all-caps words on Wikipedia you can pop a "WP:" in front of them and find the relevant page (WP:RS, WP:SYNTH, etc.). Aside from the synthesis, original research, and neutral point of view issues with your edits, "Uncommon Ground Media" is not a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SreySros (talk • contribs)
@ezlev Thank you for deleted the update. I want to ask if CBN news can be a source and the fact when searching for the book on Target web site, one can not find the book. Thank you for your help. PseudonymhelpU2 (talk) 17:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I see you declined the article "Banking in Guyana" for sounding like an essay. I'm a bit concerned because, honestly, I am a very poor essayist. I would still like to improve this article because developing countries have interesting economies, even if they're eclipsed by their colonial predecessors. If you have the time to explain what would be needed to make a suitable article on this topic, please let me know. Cheers, Estheim (talk) 22:00, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Estheim, I completely agree with you that this draft should be an article on Wikipedia. Underrepresentation of developing countries is a big problem here. I also want to apologize for not leaving a more detailed reason for the decline - you're the second person to give me that feedback today, and I'll definitely keep it in mind in the future. The main reason I didn't accept this AfC submission was the lede, which is generally supposed to summarize the article, but in this case reads more like the introduction of an essay and introduces unsourced ideas that aren't supported in the body of the article. I think improving the lede (WP:LEDE might help) would make a big difference. ezlev.talk22:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Firefly was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Almost all the sources given (apart from the first) are studies that use data from the study, rather than ones actually discussing it (e.g. assessing effectiveness).
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:MyVoice and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:MyVoice, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Ezlev!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ƒirefly ( t · c ) 13:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Federated Learning of Cohorts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wired.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tillie Kottmann you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 08:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Aloha, Ezlev! You are invited to join WikiProject Hawaii, a collaborative effort which aims to create, expand, and maintain Hawaii-related articles. If you'd like to join, please sign up here. All kōkua is appreciated! Mahalo!
Hi there, Ezlev, and welcome to Women in Red. I was interested to see you have written quite a few of articles about women and their works, including your recent expansion of Tillie Kottmann to meet GA criteria. We look forward to many more, especially biographies which are the best way to chip away at the gender gap. If you haven't already done so, you might find it useful to look through our Primer for creating women's biographies. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello Ezlev I see that you are editing and making a lot of important pages. I am just suggesting a good citation format for you to use. When using a Newspapers.com clipping you can use the first reference while you can use the second reference for any other source. Citations for books are completely different of course. Jon698 (talk) 01:38, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
On 6 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gihan Ibrahim, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Western media treated Egyptian activist Gihan Ibrahim as a face of the Egyptian revolution of 2011, but rarely mentioned her revolutionary-socialist political views? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gihan Ibrahim. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gihan Ibrahim), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
An article you recently created, Matthew Blaise, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Celestina007 (talk) 22:03, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Elli, yes indeed, that’s a valid reason, the article did not meet any criteria for deletion and also wasn’t mainspace ready(my opinion which could be flawed) so I chose an ATD, but the backlog point you raise is indeed valid. Celestina007 (talk) 22:25, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
If you don’t agree with the draftify move i made, you know you could move it back to mainspace right? Although publishing via afc is usually good practice, you could always disagree with the move, of which I would leave to another reviewer to handle. Celestina007 (talk) 22:34, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
I really appreciate you saying that, Celestina. I knew I could do that in theory, but not in practice. I think I will in this case, especially since I've added a bit to the article to make INDEPTH and SIGCOV more clear. No hard feelings on my end, though – I should've made those additions to begin with, and I think draftification was a reasonable move on your part based on the sparseness of the prose in the article. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 23:16, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
I think the problem is reconciling “notability” which is flexible and could be changed at any time with “encyclopedic value” which is, or, what we should be about, we at new page reviewing sometimes(like I did today) review articles like robots other than humans, all encyclopedic articles (of value) are not necessary “notable” and all “notable” articles are not necessarily of encyclopedic value. This article is definitely of encyclopedic value and a big thank you to Elli for reminding of this great philosophy, if an article is of encyclopedic value(like this), not promotional, nor possesses any harm to the integrity of the collaborative project, I see no reason to act like a machine. Keep up the good work. Your topic areas are of immense value. Celestina007 (talk) 23:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
The article Tillie Kottmann you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tillie Kottmann for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 00:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment
thanks for your review of Project schoolflight- I've taken your comment to heart and revised it and reduced wording by about 18% and took out elaborations so that becomes more encyclopedia read instead of an essay read. I think I really fixed it and appreciate your thoughts- trying to do it right, I am and learning too
Consider expanding the article, perhaps with sourced information about what caused the directors to found the company in the first place WP:STUB
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|1TWO3Writer}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
On 12 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kaʻelepulu Pond, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kaʻelepulu Pond, formerly a 200-to-400-acre (81 to 162 ha) Hawaiian fish pond, is now about 95 acres (38 ha) and polluted after having been partially filled in for a housing development? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kaʻelepulu Pond. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Kaʻelepulu Pond), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
You beat me by a few moments uploading a fair-use image! Since you've put much work into the article I'll let you decide whether or File:Flora Hayes 1965.png or File:Flora Kaai Hayes.jpg should be remain. It's possible that some historic images of Hayes have fallen into public domain due to failure to renew copyright, but I haven't investigated closely. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
On 14 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Moʻolelo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some moʻolelo took multiple days to tell in full, and were sometimes told in the form of hula? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Moʻolelo. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Moʻolelo), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 15 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tillie Kottmann, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to hacker Tillie Kottmann, most of her data breaches did not require much technical skill? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tillie Kottmann. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tillie Kottmann), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
When newcomers had the Reply tool and tried to post on a talk page, they were more successful at posting a comment. (Source)
Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.
The key results were:
Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.
These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.
Looking ahead
The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
On 17 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mariela Muñoz, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Argentine trans womanMariela Muñoz raised 23 children and worked as a tarot reader to support them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mariela Muñoz. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mariela Muñoz), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
I'm struggling to understand what appears to be a very determined effort from wikipedia and its admins and editors to prevent any resolution to having a wikipedia page for Fergus O'Farrell and or his band interference, I am all but at the point of giving up completely. I am four months unsuccesfully trying to prove I wrote the original interference page which was copied and pasted multiple times into several other webpages reflecting rock music and artists, I've sent the original file with metadata date stamp from the original computer I used on 19th february 2003, a computer which had to be taken out of storage for this purpose, I've followed advice, edited, answered emails, all to no avail. I am the band archivist and it seems that because I have a personal connection to the band in this regard, you folk at wikipedia have determined I cannot be the author of an article connected to either the band or fergus O'Farrell himself. You say I do not cite sources etc, I fail to see how national newspapers, Television companies and film distribution companies are not considered 'reliabe sources'. I'm the administrator of the Facebook accounts relating to the band, along with Spotify, YouTube, The Band WEbpage and Instagram and Twitter, who better to admin their wikipedia page ? I cannot use photographs I took myself, or have full and absolute permission to use everywhere else, I've been accused of plagerising my own words, I'm repeatedly told I can't do this and I can't do that without any alternative been offered, the communication from wikipedias side is both incredibly slow in response and almost impossible to understand. I'm prepared to take any advice offered but find it offensive when entire editorial is just removed and I'm told you cant have that on your page because its been previously published...yes by me.
Perhaps you could actually suggest sources or suggest rewrites of the editorial instead of just saying its wrong. I cannot begin to tell you how many newspaper articles I've had to correct regarding O'Farrell and his band, the articles which don't need correcting are written by journalists who have bothered coming to me to confirm their information before publishing. I'm doing this for 30 years, I do have a considerable knowledge of the subject.
I understand that Wiki is an encyclopedia not a forum for selling a product and welcome any advice on re-wording or de-personalising my wording,
looking forward to your response
kind regards
Marc McDonald
Marcmackdee (talk) 02:38, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Marcmackdee, I want to say first that I understand your frustration. Itʻs clear that there are multiple things going on, many of them complicated, and having experienced some of them during my time as a Wikipedia reader and later an editor, I think I can see where youʻre coming from. Iʻve tried to restate and address each point of your message below:
You've had difficulty because you've been editing articles you have a personal connection to. Wikipedia editors do tend to be specific of people who have a conflict of interest, and rightly so. We've even got a whole guideline about it. You're really not supposed to directly edit articles you have a conflict of interest about, and so you will absolutely be subject to extra scrutiny whenever you try to do so. The conflict of interest guideline may help you figure out better ways to improve these articles.
Youʻve been struggling to prove that you wrote the original version of a webpage about Interference (band), which was subsequently plagiarized, so that you can donate the text under an appropriate license for Wikipedia. This is similar to an issue I've run into while trying to help people upload images, and it's hard to deal with. I've had a look at this discussion from a while ago, and it sounds like you were going to contact OTRS, which is a good step. Based on your message above, it sounds like you haven't had luck with that. If you can tell me more about what happened with OTRS, I can try to offer advice or connect you with someone who can help, but right off the bat my advice would be for you to rewrite the content using new wording, and cite the original as a source, which could avoid the copyright issue entirely.
Similar to the previous point, you've had difficulty proving that you have the rights to images when you've tried to upload them to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. Again, this is tricky. It's also very much not my area of expertise, but if it's something you want to pursue further, feel free to tell me and I can connect you with another editor who might be able to help.
I declined the draft article you submitted (Draft:Fergus O'Farrell) because it "read like an advertisement". Unfortunately I can't look back at the draft because it looks like you've had it deleted, so all I can do is refer you to this guideline about reliable sources and this policy about neutral point of view. I know that probably isn't as helpful as you'd like, and I apologize for that.
Communication from Wikipedia has been slow and sometimes difficult to understand.Just about everyone here, including not only the editors but also the people running the OTRS email system, is a volunteer. We're doing this on our own time, unpaid, because for a wide variety of reasons we believe it's worth doing. I understand that this can sometimes lead to frustrating processes and outcomes, and again, I apologize for that.
I hope I haven't missed any major points from your message, and that this response is at least somewhat helpful. If you have any follow-up questions, feel free to leave them here – I'm not online all the time, but I promise I'll respond eventually, and one or two people who keep an eye on my talk page might jump in as well. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 04:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ezlev
thankyou for your prompt reply
I completely understand the points you make but again I feel there is something not right behind the scences with this situtation I find myself in as I try to create a page for fergus o'farrell and also his band interference.
I most certainly did not delete the fergus o'farrell page, not intentionally nor by accident, I edited it as requested and re-submitted it for further approval. The response from 'someone' was to delete the page completely and say I did so. That is simply not true. I have now requested it be re-instated, we will see what happens but my guess is I will be completely ignored.
in relation to submitting the original text for the interference page with full copyright declaration etc. I did that and recieved confirmation that the text had been accepted but it still has not been re-instated on the interference page... I copy here the full email interaction between yourselves and myself.
Email text
text for page interference (band)
Inbox
interference <interference.winstanley@gmail.com>
Attachments
30 Mar 2021, 01:16
to permissions-en, marcmackdee
To whom it may concern
the attached word document was created 19th february 2003 by marc mcdonald who is our archivist. it was created initially as a matter of record and was used on our website when it was created in 2007/2008 (www.interference.ie)
in 2009 it was placed on wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_(band)) by Marc McDonald.(aka Marcmackdee) it has been on wikipedia ever since and was updated and edited beginning 1st march 2021 by Marc McDonald as it was felt the wikipedia page was completely out of date. Fergus O'Farrell died on 2nd february 2016, the text on wikipedia was written at a time when he was very much alive and well.
the newly edited text was removed completely by your administrator
The reason given is that the text appears in several previously published webpages by others. These other websites who have used this text copied and pasted Marc McDonald s text either from our website or from wikipedia, without consent or communication with us in any way which has led to Marc McDonald being accused of plagiarism and copyright infringement of his own material. Please accept this attached document as proof that we have been in possession of this text since 2002 and that it is our copyright in its entirety. we completely allow it to be used on wikipedia in its current form or edited and updated to reflect the change in status of Fergus O'Farrell, now deceased.
The photograph/image used on the page is also 100% copyright of Marc McDonald, the original photograph of the dog 'winston' was taken by him in 1988/1989 and subsequently manipulated into its current appearance for use as a t-shirt. The original photograph of the dog can be supplied if required .
kind regards
Lydia O'Farrell Little
interference
Attachments area
Permissions - English Wikipedia <permissions-en@wikimedia.org>
2 Apr 2021, 10:33
to me, marcmackdee
Dear interference,
Wikipedia is a "free content" encyclopedia, which means that it is available under a copyright license that allows anyone to use the text for any reason, anywhere, including for commercial purposes, as long as they comply with the terms of the license. The only allowable restrictions are a requirement that the original source be attributed and that any modifications be released under the same terms.
--
Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/
---
Disclaimer: all mail to this address is answered by volunteers, and responses are not to be considered an official statement of the Wikimedia Foundation. For official correspondence, please contact the Wikimedia Foundation by certified mail at the address listed on https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/contact/
30/03/2021 00:17 - interference wrote:
> To whom it may concern
>
> the attached word document was created 19th february 2003 by marc mcdonald
> who is our archivist. it was created initially as a matter of record and
> was used on our website when it was created in 2007/2008 (
> www.interference.ie)
>
> in 2009 it was placed on wikipedia (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_(band)) by Marc McDonald.(aka
> Marcmackdee) it has been on wikipedia ever since and was updated and edited
> beginning 1st march 2021 by Marc McDonald as it was felt the wikipedia page
> was completely out of date. Fergus O'Farrell died on 2nd february 2016,
> the text on wikipedia was written at a time when he was very much alive and
> well.
>
> the newly edited text was removed completely by your administrator
>
> Diannaa <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Diannaa> (talk) 01:02, 29
> March 2021 (UTC)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Diannaa#Interference_%28band%29
>
> The reason given is that the text appears in several previously published
> webpages by others. These other websites who have used this text copied and
> pasted Marc McDonald s text either from our website or from wikipedia,
> without consent or communication with us in any way which has led to Marc
> McDonald being accused of plagiarism and copyright infringement of his
> own material. Please accept this attached document as proof that we have
> been in possession of this text since 2002 and that it is our copyright in
> its entirety. we completely allow it to be used on wikipedia in its current
> form or edited and updated to reflect the change in status of Fergus
> O'Farrell, now deceased.
>
> The photograph/image used on the page is also 100% copyright of Marc
> McDonald, the original photograph of the dog 'winston' was taken by him in
> 1988/1989 and subsequently manipulated into its current appearance for use
> as a t-shirt. The original photograph of the dog can be supplied if
> required .
>
> kind regards
>
> Lydia O'Farrell Little
>
>
>
>
> interference
>
interference <interference.winstanley@gmail.com>
Attachments
21 May 2021, 00:02
to Permissions
I hereby affirm that I Marc McDonald am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the attached text as used here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_(band), and have legal authority in my capacity to release the copyright of that work.
I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).
I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.
I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
Marc McDonald
Author of interference a brief history
21/05/21
interference
Attachments area
interference <interference.winstanley@gmail.com>
21 May 2021, 00:04
to Permissions
Permissions - English Wikipedia
8 Jun 2021, 06:05 (7 days ago)
to me
Dear interference,
We have received the permission for the text and have made the necessary modifications to the talk page of the article.
The text may now be use for the article. Please take care of the formatting, and please especially consider that Wikipedia articles have to presented in a neutral language while promotional speech is discouraged.
Marcmackdee, based on that last email it looks like they said the text could now be used in the article, not that it would be automatically added back. I think you'd need to do that yourself. You'd want to be mindful of avoiding promotional language, and like I mentioned earlier, you have a conflict of interest and should follow the COI guidelines. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 22:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Marcmackdee. The person who responded to your email said that there was a notation placed on the talk page of the article. But this was not actually ever done. Neither Draft talk:Fergus O'Farrell or Talk:Fergus O'Farrell exists and they have never existed. So it's unclear to me where they placed the details of the OTRS ticket giving permission. I am not an OTRS volunteer and do not have access to their email queue so I am unable to find out what went wrong. Regardless of the copyright issue, the band's own website is not a good source of information for a Wikipedia article, as it does nothing to establish notability, and it is not worded in an encyclopedic way. So it's of extremely limited use (or even no use) for the a Wikipedia article.— Diannaa (talk) 00:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
On 18 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Flora Kaai Hayes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in a 1922 letter to the editor, Flora Kaai Hayes defended the morality of hula compared to the "bosom to bosom, thigh to thigh dances" seen on steamboats and roof gardens at the time? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Flora Kaai Hayes. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Flora Kaai Hayes), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 19 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thelma Akana Harrison, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Honolulu Star-Bulletin described Thelma Akana Harrison as "volatile", "brilliant", and "vivacious"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thelma Akana Harrison. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Thelma Akana Harrison), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Welcome, subscribers, to the fifth Discontent Content newsletter! Discontent Content is a newsletter aiming to collate and improve Wikipedia articles in need of more eyes and hands to get them in shape. Its unique trimodal structure allows editors to work where they feel comfortable -- with stubs and starts needing to be brought to standard, mid-quality articles with Good or Featured potential, or quality-assessed articles needing help to maintain their status.
Category 1
Articles in this category are those that need to be brought up to a minimum quality standard. Some will be stubs; others will be longer articles that nonetheless have significant concerns putting them far below B- or C-class adequacy.
This issue's Category 1 articles are:
Isolar – 1976 Tour: A substantial musical event for one of the most influential albums of its era, but with a rather spindly, table-focused article (I also note no one seems to have given post-inflation numbers for any of the figures).
Occultism (Islam): "Major topic that's a literal stub because it's about something outside the comfort zone of the average editor" of the day. Esotericism in one of the world's major exoteric religions is, of course, something which can be written about extensively.
G & G v Wikimedia Foundation Inc: Going meta for a moment...This is an interesting case, and it's a shame we discuss it only as a paragraph. It would be fascinating to read further on this topic.
Category 2
Articles in this category, while in better current shape than Category 1, are still missing something. They have the potential to be truly high-quality content, and may have been at one point. With work, they can be brought up to dizzying heights.
This issue's Category 2 articles are:
Misophonia: A concept, symptom, or disorder -- no one's quite yet drawn the borderlands -- where people are unusually upset at noises such as chewing sounds. The idea may sound odd, but it does distress people with it and those around them. The subject is very popular, with Half Million Award-tier page views, but the readers are served by a rather weak article.
Sparks (band): This eccentric, creative band was a GA long ago, but delisted in 2010. Though undersourced, the article certainly has potential to return to its old status.
Han Xin: One of the great military leaders of ancient China is graced by a massively undersourced article. Several sections have none at all.
Category 3
Articles in this category have been assessed through a content review process in the past, but may require work to be brought up to current GA/FA standard. Editors can help bring them to a level where the star or plus near their names can once again shine.
This issue's Category 3 articles are:
Wind: This FA is on a huge, important topic, but its star needs some polishing. FAR notice has been given for significant uncited passages. To quote the talk page, the article has good bones, and it can certainly be restored to modern FA status if anyone is able to work on it.
Jeopardy!: The article for perhaps one of the most famous game shows of all time is at GAR for citation issues. Most of the issues brought up can be fixed quite easily, such as locating page numbers.
French fries: Tasty, but needs more sauce. The GAR discusses unsourced sections and unreliable sourcing; I also notice some pretty blatant prose issues and a spindly lead.
Maasai people: The Vital 4 article for this major East African ethnic group was recently significantly reduced due to copyvio. It needs urgent work to restore cored-out content, but the references are still available in the article to simplify the process.
One topic I've been broadly thinking about lately is the concept of GA sweeps. There hasn't been one in well over a decade; discussion of a new one is traditionally stymied by the sheer number of GAs that would need sweeping, considering there are over ten times as many as there were at the last sweep. Nonetheless, there's no dispute that many GAs don't really count as 99.5th percentile articles, or even decent-quality articles (whether one's own personal reading of WIAGA is closer to the former or the latter, and how different those things are, is an exercise for the reader).
I've been brainstorming ideas, and I've been wondering if we can tackle the problem with limited-scope sweeps. One idea would be sweeping popular or vital articles -- those that get enough views to make up a significant proportion of the "GA experience" to readers. Another would be focusing on shorter GAs, which might trend towards a less in-depth treatment of the topic than could really justify the rating. There may very well be a path here to maintaining GA standards, and either of those would have the benefit that they might be more likely to encourage people to work on rather than simply delist articles -- popular topics with lots of interested parties willing to help, or smaller topics that don't seem like too big a challenge to pick up.
Vaticidalprophet04:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
On 25 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Edith Kanakaʻole, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Edith Kanakaʻole's acceptance speech for a 1978 Na Hoku Hanohano Award was given entirely in the Hawaiian language? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Edith Kanakaʻole. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Edith Kanakaʻole), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello Ezlev:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!
On 11 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wynne Neilly, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that photographing Elliot Page for the cover of Time "really meant the world" to Canadian photographer Wynne Neilly? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wynne Neilly. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Wynne Neilly), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 18 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Annie Kanahele, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Annie Kanahele opposed the addition of diacritics to a reprint of the Bible in Hawaiian, arguing that the original exemplified the written Hawaiian language at the time of translation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Annie Kanahele. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Annie Kanahele), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 26 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Margot Heumann, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Margot Heumann is the first woman known to have survived the Nazi concentration camps despite being both Jewish and queer? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Margot Heumann. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Margot Heumann), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 22 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Duda Salabert, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that, after being elected as the first transgender city councilor of Belo Horizonte, Duda Salabert was fired from her job as a teacher when the school where she worked received a threatening email? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Duda Salabert. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Duda Salabert), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Welcome, subscribers, to the sixth Discontent Content newsletter! Discontent Content is a newsletter aiming to collate and improve Wikipedia articles in need of more eyes and hands to get them in shape. Its unique trimodal structure allows editors to work where they feel comfortable -- with stubs and starts needing to be brought to standard, mid-quality articles with Good or Featured potential, or quality-assessed articles needing help to maintain their status.
Category 1
Articles in this category are those that need to be brought up to a minimum quality standard. Some will be stubs; others will be longer articles that nonetheless have significant concerns putting them far below B- or C-class adequacy.
This issue's Category 1 articles are:
Floating match on card: This famous magic trick is a microstub with an empty section and no meaningful discussion of its methods or effects. Some useful information is available on the talk page.
Erotic horror: A significant literary (or, well...look, you know) genre with significant academic and critical coverage, which you wouldn't know from reading its three-sentence article.
Black ribbon: Currently in poor shape, with unnecessary lists attracting spurious examples, this article nonetheless has potential to cover a coherent topic on a sensitive subject.
Category 2
Articles in this category, while in better current shape than Category 1, are still missing something. They have the potential to be truly high-quality content, and may have been at one point. With work, they can be brought up to dizzying heights.
This issue's Category 2 articles are:
Violin: This twice-candidate at GAN has good bones, but suffers from expanses of uncited content (and indeed expanses of "people slapping CN tags on literally every sentence"). Much of this information should be citable, and potential exists for this article to stand tall amongst other core music articles.
Art museum: Though this looks a little underrated as a soi-disant "Start", it's nonetheless an important cultural article with significant improvement potential. This was a former candidate for the Team-B-Vital campaign ran by members of the Wikimedia Discord to bring Vital Articles to B-class status, and while not selected, it has strong potential for anyone interested in working on it.
Grocery store: Daily life has always been one of Wikipedia's coverage gaps. Though this topic is something virtually anyone deals with on a regular basis, the article struggles with cleanup tags, sandwiching, and the weird fear of prose that drives people to put everything they can in a list. With hundreds of views a day, readers deserve an article with a stronger core.
Category 3
Articles in this category have been assessed through a content review process in the past, but may require work to be brought up to current GA/FA standard. Editors can help bring them to a level where the star or plus near their names can once again shine.
This issue's Category 3 articles are:
Slackers CDs and Games: This GA hasn't had significant content edits since 2008. As much of its content references then-recent controversies, it needs a good look for updating.
Potential superpowers: GA with a multiple issues template, with concerns of outdated information, lack of citations, and potential OR.
Alzheimer's disease: This major medical FA is at FAR due to outdated information, an unfortunately common scourge of medical articles over time. Such an important article needs people willing to get it in good shape.
Letter from the Editor
After my prior thoughts on GA sweeps and their viability, work is beginning to break down what parts of the backlog can be tackled. Planning is beginning at User:Vaticidalprophet/GA reform and its talk; feel free to give your opinion, participate in current GARs, and assess articles. The current plan is to look at GAs with outstanding cleanup tags as our first priority.
Sorry for the delay this time around -- I've been having A Month healthwise. I expect to maintain this at an approximately monthly schedule and will try not to let it slip further. I'm enthused by the work going on at GAR lately and hope to work something excellent out of it. Vaticidalprophet01:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
The article Flora Kaai Hayes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Flora Kaai Hayes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aussie Article Writer -- Aussie Article Writer (talk) 16:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Well done
Congrats on passing Flora Kaai Hayes! A really fascinating, strong woman. I could see you put a lot of effort into the article, and I was very pleased that we were able to work together to have it pass GA!
Thanks for uploading File:Flora Hayes 1965.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thelma Akana Harrison you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indy beetle -- Indy beetle (talk) 07:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
The article Thelma Akana Harrison you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thelma Akana Harrison for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indy beetle -- Indy beetle (talk) 03:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Frente de Liberación Homosexual you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Urve -- Urve (talk) 11:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
The article Frente de Liberación Homosexual you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Frente de Liberación Homosexual for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Urve -- Urve (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Bob drobbs, I know that revert restrictions get complicated with rewrites. So complicated, in fact, that I'm not sure how to answer this. Based on a glance at the article history, neither of us has currently made a revert... So if you rewrite the article and remove content that I added in multiple distinct but consecutive edits, is that only one revert, or is it a 1RR violation? How about this, which is true both for AE and more broadly: I will go to a noticeboard if I feel it's necessary to resolve a content or conduct issue, but I have no desire to do so on a technicality as an attempt to get you in trouble or something – I'd much rather continue discussing on the article talk page, which has been productive so far. As a wise editor recently pointed out, WP:AE is meant to facilitate WP:DR, not the other way around – why battle when we can collaborate? ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:50, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created, Hernâni Marques, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 08:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tol was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of websites). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gimkit and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Gimkit, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Ezlev!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Tol (talk | contribs) @ 04:40, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Ancestral Guard, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Thanks for your feedbacks on my edits. I have some questions for you. And I do want to raise a NPOV dispute here with you. I have listed a more detailed version of my concern in the talk page of the article.
Could you elaborate on the "Removing inappropriate use of WP:PRIMARY sources. Per WP:BRD and to avoid edit warring, please open a discussion on the talk page rather than reinstating the changes"?
The city's medical examiner has put down those information in
1. last page of the persecutor's report saying the refusal of CTE consultation
2. The toxicity report was included in the same document.
Please clarify the citation of the medical examiner's report could violate a WP:PRIMARY sources? Those are simple citation of facts.
I listed my other concerns in the talk page, please take your valuable time to give your comments on this.
JackRayon1101, I plan to reply to your comments at the article talk page, hopefully soon if I have time. So that other users can follow what's happening, please keep the discussion there unless there's a reason to bring it here. You can ping me when you reply there to ensure that I see your reply, but even that probably isn't necessary since I'm watching the page. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 03:44, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanked twice?
Nice work on Steve Alm. If I could pester you about something: you somehow managed to thank me twice for this edit. Do you remember how you did that? It's usually impossible: per WP:THANKS#Details and limitations, "You can only thank someone for a given edit once"; the "thank" link normally goes away. Just curious in case there's some sort of bug that needs to be resolved. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
LeCenterLeader, I don't know what you mean. The Reference desk may be able to help if you have a question about something unrelated to Wikipedia, and I'll put some useful links on your talk page in case your question is related to editing Wikipedia. If you have any other questions please feel free to ask them here! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 17:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
Review of updated submission for Mildred B. Thurow Tate
Ezlev -- thank you for your recommendations on the draft Mildred Bertha Thurow Tate article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Mildred_Bertha_Tate_(Thurow)). The article has been revised and resubmitted as reliable sources have been used in lieu of those you identified as unreliable. Could you please look over my revisions? There is only one source that wasn't replaced, it was for the Southern Sociological Society as it is the official website of the society. I was also wondering if you could help me to upload her photo here is the link: https://vtwomenshistory.lib.vt.edu/items/show/91. I am a novice content creator and appreciate your assistance and feedback.Tkwoods87 (talk) 15:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Tkwoods87, great job making changes – the article looks much better! I'd rather let another reviewer take a look at it, so you'll need to be patient, but I'm confident you're well on the way to getting this accepted as an article. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 17:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello Samirmahmudbd! It does seem like there might be some issues with referencing in your draft. Some sentences, like "Sohel is married to Mahafuza Akhter", don't have a reference. Also, some parts of the article seem to use the subject's own website as a reference, which might not be allowed. I put a link to an editing tutorial on your talk page, which might be helpful. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 20:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Dear Ezlev,
Thanks for your previous help. You give me proper guidelines. As per your guideline, I have replaced his own website link with a proper authentic news source. I will be glad if check the article again?
Samirmahmudbd, hello again! Parts of the draft still don't seem to have sources that support them, so it still needs work, but it's definitely getting better. If you want to move toward making it an article, you can put {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page to start the Articles for Creation process. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 07:42, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey Friend, I need your help to make this article more perfect for submission. Could please help to find out why the article is declined?? I will be glad if you help me again. Thanks & regards --Samirmahmudbd (talk) 06:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Dear, You are awesome, Thanks for helping me again. I have added more authentic references to the article. Could you please check now and suggest to me if need to add or delete anything.
Thanks & regards --Samirmahmudbd (talk) 11:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Have a good day! I will be glad if you please check my draft again and is this now perfect for resubmit?? I have changed lots of reference --Samirmahmudbd (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Samirmahmudbd, yes, you should resubmit your draft if you think it's been improved enough for publication. Even if it gets declined, you'll get feedback that might be useful for improving it more. If it gets declined again I can take a closer look and try to help. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 21:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
On 25 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Black Student Union, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that within a year after the first Black Student Union was founded at San Francisco State College in March 1966, it had a presence at every state college in California? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Black Student Union. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Black Student Union), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Makenna Goodman, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
On 31 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gather (film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2020 documentary film Gather, which explores Native American efforts for food sovereignty and reclamation of ancestral foodways, was named a Critic's Pick by The New York Times? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gather (film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gather (film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Sideswipe9th, "having a word" would indicate a conversation – while I've addressed Dtobiasat Talk:Irreversible Damage as well as on their own talk page, and I'm virtually certain that they've seen my messages, they haven't engaged in conversation. (They've also already received a DS alert for the topic area, here.) Because of that and because I've made my points clear, I'm not sure it would be productive for me to continue restating the same points to them. If the issue continues I'll absolutely take it to an appropriate noticeboard. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 01:19, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
On second thought, I'm going to leave another short note at the user's talk page since you asked. Everything else I've said still stands. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 01:21, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't respond to the messages and get a discussion going, but I'm getting the feeling that involving myself in these discussions is, like in the ending of the movie WarGames, a game where the only winning move is not to play. User:Crossroads seems to be bowing out too. *Dan T.* (talk) 04:15, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Ezlev. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "MyVoice".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Hello, Ezlev. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nadia Awad, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Sweden report: The Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk; More museum data on Wikidata; LGBT edit-a-thon; Local business history in Nyköping; Stockholm City Museum ♥ Wikipedia; Writing about fashion at Nordiska museet
UK report: British Library and Khalili Collections
USA report: Wikiconference North America + Workshops
Content Partnerships Hub report: Needs assessment interviews; Cultural heritage on Wikidata – thousands of monuments in Norway; Structured Data uploads continue
Ezlev, thank you for your contributions to DYK! Keep up the great work, and I look forward to seeing more of your DYKs! Upjav (talk) 06:18, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'm new to the DYK process, but have tried to address the points you brought up at Template:Did you know nominations/Whaling in the Faroe Islands. I'm still trying to figure out how these templates work and what is required, so any assistance or response to my questions would be appreciated. I also noticed that the "DYKnom" template had been removed - does this mean that the entry has been un-nominated? Iskandar323 (talk) 09:57, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Iskandar323, all the points you raised in response to my review of the nomination appear to be correct. I’m sorry for not seeing your response sooner - in the future it might be a good idea to ping reviewers when replying to a review, since some (like myself) don’t tend to add their reviewed nominations to their watchlists. I’ll approve the nom right now ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 17:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ezlev! Thanks again for conducting the GA review for Susan Catania. I'm happy to share that the article will be posted on DYK tomorrow morning. I really appreciate the work you do on women's biographies in Wikipedia! Edge3 (talk) 04:34, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Thrilled to hear it, Edge3! I find your work admirable too. I’ve got a couple DYK hooks going up in tomorrow’s afternoon slot – it’s always exciting, isn’t it? ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 06:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
On 18 November 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dee Duponte, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that upon hearing about a 600-worker walkout reportedly prompted by difficulties she caused, Dee Duponte responded "fiddlesticks"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dee Duponte. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dee Duponte), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
I laughed. even setting aside the tropes and just considering my own experience in/with the jewish community, it’s a funny idea to me. how long do you think any one person could last as director of the jewish community before a majority of jews wanted them out of the position? I’d give it a week maximum. besides, everyone knows the space laser is controlled by consensus, that’s why we hardly ever use it ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 16:36, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!
Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar07:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Czar, I very much do want to watch that page, so thank you. I've seen some of your work as well, and I'm flattered to find a message from you here. Here's to a future of collaboration! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 07:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
For Outstanding in the Field and super weaner, you magnificent dingus—yeah, sure, you've got insightful, thought-provoking, and sometimes depressing nominations, but you also have hooks that are full-belly-laugh excellent and those are just priceless. Also, I find it personally offensive that this isn't called the "Barnstar of Good Humour". Thanks for making me laugh; cheers!
I aim to please, leek, and this means a lot, so thank you. Gotta have some fun mixed in with the serious – it helps keep me going, and I’m thrilled it lightens your day sometimes too! (And by the way, “magnificent dingus” is quite possibly my favorite thing I’ve ever been called.) ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 17:43, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
DYK for Spotify Wrapped
On 6 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Spotify Wrapped, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Spotify Wrapped has been both praised and criticized for effectively providing Spotify with free advertising? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Spotify Wrapped. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Spotify Wrapped), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 6 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article .kosher, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that OK Kosher got the OK for .kosher in January 2014? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/.kosher. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, .kosher), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 8 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Edigna, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to legend, Edigna fled an arranged marriage in 1074, leaving her royal life behind to live as a hermit in a hollowed-out tree in Fürstenfeldbruck? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Edigna. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Edigna), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
An article you recently created, Ximena Abogabir, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 04:14, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
DGG, I have a question about the issue tags you've added to several articles I created. Some of them, like the one on Parley for the Oceans, I think I understand – but I don't understand the motivation for adding {{Cleanup-PR}} to Mar Cambrollé and Fundación Huésped, or {{Advert}} to Outstanding in the Field. I wonder if you might be able to state a reason in the edit summary for future tags, which I believe Twinkle facilitates, or leave a brief note about the tag/issue on the article talk page? This would also help me in cases like Mastery Transcript Consortium, where I believe there might be parts of it that are written like an advertisement but am having trouble seeing exactly which parts those are. (Another way to avoid drive-by tagging is of course to fix the issue yourself.)
More broadly, seeing all these tags added to articles for which I wrote most or all of the content makes me think you see some issue in the way I construct articles more generally. If that's the case, I'd appreciate an explanation so that I can work on improving in the future. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
I do not look at who wrote the content when I place a tag. I've trained myself to avoid seeing it. I certainly do not remember user names from one article to another--I have always had a poor memory for names, and now it comes in useful.
As for the articles, I'll have to put this off until tomorrow. But I will just say that the existing tags are much too inflexible. It would be much more helpful to write a detailed explanation, and that's possible for a draftify tag, but not for advert or cleanupPR. The problem is that it's too much work considering the number of new articles that must be looked at, so I like other reviewers usually only explain when asked. DGG ( talk ) 07:36, 24 November 2021 (UTC) �
Thanks for the reply, DGG, and for your willingness to provide a bit more explanation – I'll look forward to that. I was mainly wondering because of strings like [5][6][7][8], where you draftified or tagged four articles I had created within as many minutes – but that must be a function of whatever tool you're using for the review, which makes sense. I could've sworn at least some of those had already been reviewed, though? ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 07:45, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Ukraine report: Aricle contest for librarians «Local cultural heritage and prominent people»
USA report: Smithsonian demos new Wiki API Connector tool and other meetups
Content Partnerships Hub report: We continue building for the hub; SDC for fun and profit: detecting bad coordinates; Needs assessment – video recorded interviews; Improving ISA
WMF GLAM report: Wikisource birthday celebration, Community Tech Wishlist, and upcoming conversation about courses for GLAM professionals
On 8 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Outstanding in the Field, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on an average night, between 130 and 200 people can be found Outstanding in the Field(example pictured) for about five hours? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Outstanding in the Field. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Outstanding in the Field), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
WOW. My best-performing DYK nom so far. I’m proud of the hook itself but I’m guessing the photo slot goes a long way to boost clicks, too. Thanks for all the work you’re doing at DYK, theleekycauldron, including these stats tables! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 02:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
On 10 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Super weaner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that super weaners may be "milk thieves" or "double mother-sucklers"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Super weaner. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Super weaner), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Thanks, Helper201, for this message and for your edits to the article! I do like the userbox, and especially the photo in it – something about it makes me smile. Here's to a world more like that. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:00, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
No problem. I'll try and help improve it more if I can but I think you've done a great job on it! Thank you, I found it hard think of what photo to use for the infobox so I'm glad you think this one suits it well. Helper201 (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
DYK for The Undercommons
On 13 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Undercommons, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Undercommons, an essay collection that criticizes academia, was written by two alumni of Harvard University? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Undercommons. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Undercommons), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 12 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sigismund Danielewicz, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Sigismund Danielewicz's(pictured) career in the California labor movement ended after he delivered an 1885 speech advocating against the persecution of Chinese people? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sigismund Danielewicz. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Sigismund Danielewicz), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 12 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ememem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "the surgeon of the sidewalks" is anonymous? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ememem. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ememem), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 17 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Boycott (2021 film), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the documentary film Boycott includes the stories of three Americans who sued their state governments after being affected by anti-BDS laws? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Boycott (2021 film). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Boycott (2021 film)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 18 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fortune-499, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to critics, Fortune-499 is "an effective story of capitalist humdrum" that involves "witchcraft, mid-20s malaise, and puns"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fortune-499. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Fortune-499), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 21 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article R/antiwork, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after Kellogg's announced plans to replace striking workers in 2021, members of r/antiwork organized to submit fake applications to the company's hiring system? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/R/antiwork. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, R/antiwork), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 21 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cibo (artist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Cibo paints Italian food over neo-fascist graffiti? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cibo (artist). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cibo (artist)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
On 24 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Jew's Christmas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Jew's Christmas was the first American film to have a rabbi as one of its characters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Jew's Christmas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Jew's Christmas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Hello everyone, and welcome to the 22nd issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter. This issue will be covering new and updated user scripts from the past seven months (June through December 2021).
Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!
Featured script
LuckyRename, by Alexis Jazz, is this month's featured script. LuckyRename makes requesting file moves easier, and automates the many steps in file moving (including automatic replacement of existing usage). Give it a shot!
Updated scripts
SD0001: hide-reverted-edits has been updated to take into account changes in reversion tools like Twinkle and RedWarn.
ClaudineChionh: SkinSwitcher (a fork and update of Eizen's script) provides an options menu/toolbox/toolbar allowing users to view a given page in MediaWiki's default skins.
Wikipedia:User scripts/Ranking is a sortable table of Wikipedia's thousand-or-so most commonly used scripts; it includes their author, last modification date, installation count, and sometimes a short description.
Toolhub is a community managed catalog of software tools used in the Wikimedia movement. Technical volunteers can use Toolhub to document the tools that they create or maintain. All Wikimedians can use Toolhub to search for tools to help with their workflows and to create lists of useful tools to share with others.
draft-sorter sorts AfC drafts by adding WikiProject banners to their talk pages. It supersedes User:Enterprisey/draft-sorter, adding a few features and fixing some bugs.
BooksToSfn adds a portlet link in Visual Editor's source mode editing, in main namespace articles or in the user's Sandbox. When clicked, it converts one {{cite book}} inside a <ref>...</ref> tag block into an {{Sfn}}.
diffedit enables editing directly from viewing a diff "when, for instance, you notice a tiny mistake deep into an article, and don't want to edit the entire article and re-find that one line to fix that tiny mistake".
warnOnLargeFile warns you if you're about to open a very large file (width/height >10,000px or file size >100 MB) from a file page.
QuickDiff (by OneTwoThreeFall at Fandom) lets you quickly view any diff link on a wiki, whether on Recent Changes, contribs pages, history pages, the diff view itself, or elsewhere. For more information, view its page on Fandom.
talkback creates links after user talk page links like this: |C|TB (with the first linking to the user's contributions, and the latter giving the option of sending a {{talkback}} notice). It also adds a [copy] link next to section headers.
diff-link shows "copy" links on history and contributions pages that copy an internal link to the diff (e.g., Special:Diff/1026402230) to your clipboard when clicked.
auto-watchlist-expiry automatically watchlists every page you edit for a user-definable duration (you can still pick a different time using the dropdown, though).
generate pings generates the wikitext needed to ping all members of a category, up to 50 editors (the limit defined by MediaWiki).
share ExpandTemplates url allows for easy sharing of your inputs to Special:ExpandTemplates. It adds a button that, when clicked, copies a shareable URL to your exact invocation of the page, like this. Other editors do not need to have this script installed in order to access the URL generated.
show tag names shows the real names of tags next to their display names in places such as page revision histories or the watchlist.
ColourContrib color-codes the user contributions page so that pages you've edited last are sharply distinguished from pages where another editor was the last to edit the page.
All in all, some very neat scripts were written in these last few months. Hoping to see many more in the next issue -- drop us a line on the talk page if you've been writing (or seeing) anything cool and good. Filling in for DannyS712, this has been jp×g. Take care, and merry Christmas! jp×g07:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
A large A/B test will start soon.[3] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.
The Wikipedia Library
Hello! Your submission of Gihan Ibrahim at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Drmies (talk) 00:28, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 08:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Tillie Kottmann for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 10:21, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
; see Talk:Tillie Kottmann for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 00:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aussie Article Writer -- Aussie Article Writer (talk) 11:21, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Flora Kaai Hayes for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aussie Article Writer -- Aussie Article Writer (talk) 13:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
; see Talk:Flora Kaai Hayes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aussie Article Writer -- Aussie Article Writer (talk) 16:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Ezlev. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nadia Awad, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
talk 19:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg)
Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here!
New scripts
