Jump to content

User talk:Rosguill/Archive 31

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32Archive 33→Archive 35

NPP Tips

Hello Rosguill,

You appear to be a very prolific new page patroller, so I’d like to ask you for a bit of help. I’m worried that I’m not reviewing pages properly, even though I read all of the instructions and guidelines. With this in mind, do you have any tips for a newbie NPP like me so that I can do the job well and accurately? Thank you, CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 23:39, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

CollectiveSolidarity, the quick guides provides some subject-specific practical advice, is there anything in particular you have questions about? signed, Rosguill talk 02:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
@Rosguill If a page is created from a redirect, and it has trivial sources supporting it (IMDB, Facebook, etc.) can I nominate it for a proposed deletion? On that subject, I should wait a few hours to monitor for any improvements, correct? CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 02:35, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
CollectiveSolidarity My usual process is to wait at least a few hours before doing anything, and then typically start with a notability tag, then letting that sit for a bit before taking action. The exception would be for BLPs or other sensitive articles with extremely inadequate referencing. It's also important to remember that restoring the prior redirect is usually a valid and preferable alternative to deletion, and technically can be done as a BOLD edit without a discussion (although be careful as it can come off as BITE-y). signed, Rosguill talk 03:16, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
@Rosguill Once again, thank you. Oh, and I believe that we crossed paths at Chan Zuckerberg Biohub. Since I perceived that consensus was to move to CZ Biohub, can you briefly explain your reasoning so that I can become a better non-admin move closer in the future? If this is coming across as a bit chatty, I apologize. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 22:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
CollectiveSolidarity no worries. My reading of the discussion is as follows: there's momentum in favor of Chan Zuckerberg Biohub as no one has yet to object to it since its proposal, and it has a stronger policy basis, based on assessments of what RS say rather than what the subject says. d signed, Rosguill talk 22:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Stephen Harper on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:32, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kron Gracie on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Uncivil editor

Hello Rosguill, can you take action against this editor? [1], i've given them warnings and notified them of discretionary sanctions but they continue with their incivility. This seems like a WP:NOTHERE Magherbin (talk) 12:58, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

I've issued a final warning, looking at their edit history briefly I'm not sure it's accurate to jump to NOTHERE, and they have not received any warnings from editors other than you. signed, Rosguill talk 14:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikimedia chapters

Hi Rosguill. I hope you are well and fine. What is your opinion on Wikipedia articles about chapters and affiliates of Wikimedia? Do you feel they should be seen same as other organisations per WP:NORG and generally per WP:GNG? Do we have any specific guidelines about them? Thanks. ─ The Aafī (talk) 12:57, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

TheAafi, To be honest, I'm not sure I've ever come across such an article in new page review. Holding them to the same standard as other organizations seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 14:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

I would like to be your student to become a New Page Reviewer

Hello @Rosguill

Thank you for taking the time to train people that see to become New Page Reviewers! I have an interest in this because I help a lot on the encyclopedia with reverting vandalism and seek to add to my repertoire on ways that I can assist in adding to the greatest collection of information in human history. I have an extensive history of improving Wikipedia. I have made nearly 7,000 edits (a significant of that being reverting vandalism), and have made improvements and additions to pages over the course of my tenure on the website. This is a passion project of mine and would be incredibly grateful for your assistance in becoming a New Page Reviewer. Thank you!

Pulpfiction621 (talk) 15:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Pulpfiction621, what sort of training are you looking for? There's a full course that covers all the bases of new page reviewing, but if there's more specific areas of focus that you want to work on that can be considered as well. signed, Rosguill talk 16:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
I was just hoping to enroll in the new page reviewer school, if you know how to do that? Thanks! Pulpfiction621 (talk) 17:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Pulpfiction621, I've set up a page for you at User:Rosguill/Pulpfiction621 NPPSCHOOL. Feel free to start whenever you like. signed, Rosguill talk 17:57, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello @Rosguill, here is the completed first assignment. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rosguill/Pulpfiction621_NPPSCHOOL&diff=1097082541&oldid=1096947105 Pulpfiction621 (talk) 14:37, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

NPP School training

Hi Rosguill. I am Hulged. I'd like to continue my NPP training and start from where I left. If you are free, will you please take me as your adoptee again. Thanks. --Bears (talk) 18:23, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Sure, feel free to pick up where you left off. signed, Rosguill talk 19:29, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, Rosguill. I'll start in a few days and ping you there. Is that alright? --Bears (talk) 04:22, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Yep, sounds good. signed, Rosguill talk 14:49, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Single-party government

Hello ... the page Single-party government is about something different from One-party state, see wikidata. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:12, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Yep, I see what you mean, but I think that in that case creating the redirect is not helpful for readers and it should be deleted pending the creation of an actual en.wiki article on single-party governments. signed, Rosguill talk 20:14, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Michael Phillips (historian)

Did you just delete a redirect at Michael Phillips (historian) to accept Draft:Michael Phillips (historian)? That redirect has non-trivial history and should be restored or history-merged. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:15, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

I was in the process of reviewing the history of the redirect and it disappeared. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:15, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, weird, I thought I had checked the history, but you're right. I must have pulled up the wrong page by accident. I don't have time to do much further work right now so I'll just restore the page. signed, Rosguill talk 23:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Okay. I will do a round-robin move. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:19, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Round-robin move done. I am now asking at the AFC talk page how a reviewer is supposed to request a round-robin move. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Re: noeta

Noeta is better as a disambiguation because philosophy academics use the ancient & modern Greek word 'noeta' transliterated to English in Platonism writings since centuries ago, long preceding the flies it's an apparently only rarely-used alternative spelling for.--dchmelik (t|c) 20:40, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

My concern is that we don't really have an appropriate article to attach to an entry for "noeta" at a dab page, as we don't have an article that describes it. Perhaps a redlink would be appropriate? signed, Rosguill talk 20:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Many redirects aren't exact and plenty are good enough: nous, noema, noetics, noumenon, etc. (but also ask people with philosophy degrees.) I don't know what you mean about red link.--dchmelik (t|c) 21:47, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
As in, creating a dab page that would read something like:
Noeta may refer to:
Noeta, a genus of fruit fly
Noeta (philosophy), a concept in Platonist philosophy and the focus of study of Noetics
Another dab page alternate would be:
Noeta may refer to:
Noeta, a genus of fruit fly
Noeta, a concept in Platonist philosophy and the focus of study of Noetics
The challenge here is deciding whether the concept of noeta deserves its own article (example 1), or if it is best described as a subsection of a related topic (example 2). signed, Rosguill talk 22:17, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
It's also not just Platonism but any Greek-language or derived philosophy (a lot of other ancient/Classical/Hellenistic/Mediterranean & Western including somewhat the large German Idealism school of thought) that discusses some things are intelligible. I'd be okay with directing it to nous (mind, which has what's intelligible) or noetics (study of the intelligible realm) or maybe noema (mental /intelligible objects) but probably not noumenon (as that's a cause that has an effect, as in causality.)--dchmelik (t|c) 00:00, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok, I've gone ahead and written a new disambiguation page based on this discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 00:48, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Looks good; many thanks!--dchmelik (t|c) 02:46, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
The Philosophy Barnstar
many thanks! dchmelik (t|c) 02:46, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

American Bantam languages

You made a change to the description of the American Bantam page. Do you know how to add on the Languages for links to American Bantam pages in other languages. Right now they are all attached to American Austin, which is technically wrong, but not a big deal. But most of these language translations should also be attached to American Bantam. I couldn't figure out how to move / Split this. See:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q463449#sitelinks-wikipedia Charliep8 (talk) 04:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Charliep8 I've taken care of it. There may be a more efficient way to do it, but my method was:
  1. Delete all of the erroneous links on the Wikidata page (and open each of those respective articles to prepare step 2)
  2. Individually link each of the now-decoupled articles to American Bantam using the buttons on the sidebars of the articles' pages on Wikipedia
Some refreshing was necessary in order to get each page to render the updated links once changes were made. signed, Rosguill talk 14:56, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Brilliant. There is a very French version of American Austin that also includes information about American Bantam (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Austin_Car_Company). Perhaps you can add a link to that article as well. Sad that there is misinformation still saying Austin and Bantam were the same company, but now only in French. Maybe we can look for somebody who speaks French to split that article. Charliep8 (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Sundara Karma Oblivion! review

Hi, there. I saw that you put a template message on this page that said it "may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline" as well as "some of the sources aren't reliable". I'm so sure what I put there don't go against the guideline and what I did is the exactly the same as what the other contributors did to the other Sundara Karma's album pages. Funny that your stated reason is "The three reviews listed all appear to be from sites that engage in pay-for-play" because literally almost all of the articles for Sundara Karma's albums have the same sources for the album review section. If you can convince me that my contributions there really aren't "notable" worthy then you may as well put the same template messages on every Sundara Karma's album pages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sundara_Karma_albums). If you can't, well thanks for ending my good intentions to do what I can to contribute for Wikipedia.

Hope your day went well. -Chyntiaar (talk) 16:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

It looks like I may have been incorrect about DIY and Dork--both sites have open calls for submissions, but it's not clear that they are pay-for-play submissions. Gigwise's contact page for submissions, however, includes a link to this site, which is pretty clearly a pay-for-play setup. signed, Rosguill talk 16:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Draft:British Hound Sports Association

Hello, you recently reviewed a page I wrote, called Trail hunting. Prior to that, I'd also written the page Draft:British Hound Sports Association. It was sent to draftspace (not by you) within 30 minutes(!) yet is still waiting to be reviewed. Is there any chance you could look at it for me please. Many thanks, Obscurasky (talk) 10:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I generally don't do reviews on request. Our backlog is a few months long, but we do get through it, so please be patient. signed, Rosguill talk 16:38, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Moved to draftspace in less than 30 minutes, but takes a few months to review? No worries, thanks anyway. Obscurasky (talk) 00:31, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Violence against men on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but also:

Hey, I saw you granted me psuedo-AP (thanks!), but apparently the bot will re-review when I unreview it. I wanted to leave this in the queue for another reviewer to check, hence why I hit unreview. This particular one I'm fine with leaving and have watchlisted, but Is there a foolproof way to force a page into the queue? Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hm, I don't think there's an existing way for you to force unpatrol on redirects if you have the pseduoperm, as the bot that operates on it is just going to keep marking it reviewed when it runs. DannyS712 would have a more definitive answer--I imagine it is technically possible to add a template flag to pages you want to skip from review but don't know how trivial or not that is to implement. signed, Rosguill talk 01:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey, saw that my article was deleted. Kindly help so l can retrieve it and edit as per your guidance. It has been on my sandbox for long and thought the ones l asked to review have done so. User:Sichelesile Sichelesile (talk) 21:48, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Sichelesile, I cannot restore the article, even as a draft, as the article was largely copyright-violating text, which is not allowed anywhere on Wikipedia, even draftspace. signed, Rosguill talk 22:19, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_July_13#World Open Chinese Studies Journal

Please close this as keep/malformed/wrong venue or whatever. Deleting this redirect has huge implications for every other such redirects. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:13, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid that would be canvassing at this point (supercanvassing?), but it looks like the discussion is heading towards a keep so I'm confident whoever ends up closing it will make the right call. signed, Rosguill talk 14:57, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Re - Establish Article

Hello Rosguill please re establish the article of Sangramsingh Thakur last time this article was deleted for the reason of lack of sources and non notable actor WP:NACTOR but now he have significant sources for creating article so please re establish the article or suggest what should we do Next. MereBabuji (talk) 15:51, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Looks like the last deletion was due to the article being egregiously promotional, so I'm not inclined to restore the most recent deleted version. signed, Rosguill talk 15:54, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Also, given your post here, are there multiple people who use your account to edit or are you just one person? signed, Rosguill talk 15:56, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

question about article changed to draft

Article Omar Veluz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Omar_Veluz was moved to draft due to original poster not posting if they had a conflict of interest or not (I looked through the contributors and view history and saw their talk page with your message)  I don’t know who the original poster is.  I have no affiliation with the original poster or Omar Veluz but am aficionado of Omar Veluz's work in many aspects.  I had previously made minor edits including birthdates, prior to the draftification of the article.  I then added some additional revisions and sent to Articles for Consideration.  Since it may take up to 4 months to have this article reviewed, would it just be easier to start over and I write a new article? There is so much more information that could be added and others in Wikipedia that he is connected to.  Or could the draftification be removed?  Thank you for any help.  dvpo2

Dvpo2 (talk) 21:18, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Dvpo2, I would recommend working on the existing draft and submitting it--the backlog for newly-created articles and articles in draft space are about equal length, so there's no reason to avoid one in favor of the other. signed, Rosguill talk 21:20, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your quick reply. I will continue to work on the existing draft. Have a good day. Dvpo2 (talk) 13:06, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Topic ban violation

Hi Rosguill. You issed user:Grandmaster an indefinite WP:AA2 topic ban in Feb 2022.[2] In May 2022 they created this article from scratch[3] which includes this sentence: "After the February Revolution in 1917, Keller was one of the two Russian generals, along with Huseyn Khan Nakhchivanski, who supported the Czar." Per the eponymous article of Huseyn Khan Nakhchivanski: "was a Russian Cavalry General of Azerbaijani origin". I believe this constitutes a clear violation of their topic ban, as they aren't allowed to edit anything even remotely related to AA2. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:54, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

LouisAragon Given that this involves Azerbaijan but does not clearly involve the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, I think this is a glancing enough violation that I would rather see it brought to AE rather than unilaterally issuing a block on the spot. signed, Rosguill talk 15:03, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2020 Ganja missile attacks on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:32, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

NPP Queue

Hi @Rosguill - I'm not sure who would be best to ask about this but I figured you'd be a good initial contact for this question since I know you are heavily involved with NPP. I know there's an ongoing backlog drive for NPP but I'm noticing the queue is unfortunately starting to level off again. As a statistician I'm curious to try to calculate exactly what level of effort would be required to clear out the queue and keep it close to zero on an ongoing basis. Would you happen to know if it's possible to retrieve a list of timestamps at which articles are entering and exiting the queue? Not sure if anyone is already looking at this but I would appreciate any guidance or commentary on this topic. Paradoxsociety 22:41, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Paradoxsociety, I know that some NPPers have tried looking into this and got mixed results as far as what data was available. I would suggest you open a thread at WT:NPR to ask them directly, as I'm personally fuzzy on the details. signed, Rosguill talk 23:51, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response @Rosguill - will do! Paradoxsociety 00:03, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Rosguill. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 06:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Vanamonde (Talk) 06:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Question for you

Does this look like a problem to you? Atsme 💬 📧 18:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Atsme it looks like the editor has been marking things as reviewed while CSD tagging, but in all cases they appear to have placed the tag themselves, so it's not an indication of black-hat editing but rather a minor error in following the flowchart instructions. Unless there's something other than the streak of reviewed-and-deleted pages at the top of their log that drew your attention? signed, Rosguill talk 19:07, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok, that's what I needed to know – the minor part of marking them reviewed. Thank you! Atsme 💬 📧 20:51, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Question.

Друзьями, I think we're done here. The original question has been answered, further arguing over the content at-issue can proceed at a more relevant talk page. signed, Rosguill talk 18:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

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

Hi Rosguill, hope you're doing well. This discussion got archived, but I didn't hear back from my opposing users. I made the arguments that any speculative threats (stated as speculative even by RS) are WP:UNDUE to be included and this is hardly a Blp case, but the info was removed regardless during the discussion as "consensus whether there are BLP issues or not is not reached yet". I'm planning to restore the info and add the RFE source since my opposing users didn't address my latest arguments, but I wanted to consult an admin first before doing so. Best, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Zani, I'm not sure why you're so eager to raise your concerns on the various admins' talk pages without talking to the involved parties. I strongly advise continuing this conversation on the BLP board, but I will respond here to avoid Rossguill from making comments based on inadequate information. You did not address any of the raised concerns, neither you brought any valid counter arguments, how you going restore the statement?.
Vaqif Dargahli's comment is not recognized as Armenophobia in any RS. We can't just choose anything and call it Armenophobia; it has to be characterized as such by the RS. Moreover, Vagif Dargahly was just commenting on the possibility of a strike in response, such stated in the referenced source source. This RFE source is not an "argument" since it does not matter was ther threat or not, and since I referenced source confirming that there was such a threat. Synthesizing / cherry-picking information from several sources to represent something that is not Armenophobia as Armenophobia? This is not fit for Wikipedia. Abrvagl (talk) 12:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Zani, I'm not sure why you're so eager to raise your concerns on the various admins' talk pages without talking to the involved parties. I strongly advise continuing this conversation on the BLP board. You did not address any of the raised concerns, neither you brought any valid counter arguments, how you going restore the statement?.

I'm not sure how to even approach such statements. The discussion LITERALLY got archived because you didn't reply to me, neither did the other user whom I pinged 2 TIMES to reply to my arguments. I'm not going to engage you here btw. I made my arguments on the discussion itself, especially the WP:UNDUE aspect of including a speculation along with the unjust provocation/threat that perfectly fits within the article. You had the chance to reply to my latest arguments, you didn't, you're now coming here when I'm bringing up this to admin attention (because this is something contentious in my view and I want to consult an admin before even breaching WP:1RR) and challenging my good faith actions with this bad faith line of questioning? See WP:ASPERSIONS and don't ever approach me with the nonsense I talk quoted above, especially when I'm taking good faith measures before reverting you. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
you did not address neither of the raised concerns, I replied to yours. Sorry, I did not know that I should reply every time you repeat yourself, but here I am letting you know that consensus is not reached.
I did not raised any “bad faith” questioning, I rly and with all good faith interested why you talking to admins without talking to other involved parties, since it is not a first or second case. But since you assert me in bad faith, looks like you are the one who need to see and understand what WP:ASPERSIONS is about. Abrvagl (talk) 13:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
  • It looks to me like the status quo ante is to include the threat, although given the article's history calling it "stable" is perhaps a stretch. I don't think that invoking BLP is valid here, that's typically for personal information, whereas the issue here is a statement on behalf of a government by an official representative. That having been said, unless sources describe the threat as an example of "anti-Armenian sentiment", including it in the article is arguably original research; threatening a target with military action is not implicitly an example of anti-Armenian chauvinism unless sources draw attention to it as such. signed, Rosguill talk 15:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    That's not a target for military action though Rosguill, that's the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant. Armenia doesn't have nukes, this is a power plant for energy production. Striking this would be catastrophic for the region, not only Armenia. Pretty sure we don't need a source implicitly stating that threatening to strike a power plant that's not even a military target is Anti-Armenian sentiment. But if you're asking for it, this was the response of Armenia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
    And reliable source such as RFE article clearly states that there were no threats coming from Armenia, it attributes fake threats to speculation;
    • “There was speculation that the Armenian side had first hinted it might somehow strike a civilian target – such as the Mingachevir Dam -- but there was no evidence of any official making such a threat” ZaniGiovanni (talk) 15:36, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    If you think I shouldn't restore the info after reading my elaborative comment above, I won't argue further. Please let me know. Regards, ZaniGiovanni (talk) 15:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    eh, it's a grey area. You appear to have right-of-way as far as BRD and the status quo, and your argument about the power plant's nature isn't baseless--I do think that there is some room there to argue that wartime activity, even when involving non-combatant targets, is a loose fit for anti-X sentiment, as the framing of "anti-X sentiment" suggests a bigoted animus beyond military expediency, but at the same time it's also plausible that additional sources exist that would support its inclusion. signed, Rosguill talk 15:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    Vaqif Dargahli did not make such a comment anywhere. He was commenting on the question from the journalist on the possibility of a strike in response i.e. striking Metsamor in response to Armenia striking Mingachevir hydro-power plant. This is clearly written in the referenced article. We can not disengage the answer from the question to imply that it was said with no reason and that it is anti-Armenian chauvinism. . Yes, Vaqif Dargahli is an official, but it does not mean that we can cherry-pick information when we talking about him; it is still BLP in some extent.
    The RFE article is an opinion piece and it does not claim that there are was no such threat, they attribute it to the according to RFE/RL's Armenian Service. Here is the full quote:

    There was speculation that the Armenian side had first hinted it might somehow strike a civilian target – such as the Mingachevir Dam -- but there was no evidence of any official making such a threat, according to RFE/RL's Armenian Service.

    . Nevertheless, here is the proof that there was a such threat: Karabakh Army Chief Warns Of Missile Strikes On Azerbaijan (azatutyun.am)

    That having been said, 1. what Vaqif Dargahli stated is not anti-Armenian chauvinism. When X says they can hurt Y, and Y replies that they can hurt in response- it is not about phobia. Thus, the statement should not be included in the article unless there is RS describing it as that. 2. Statement of the Vaqif Dargahli can not be included anywhere without appropriate background information. Otherwise, it will be misleading. Abrvagl (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

    Nevertheless, here is the proof that there was a such threat: Karabakh Army Chief Warns Of Missile Strikes On Azerbaijan (azatutyun.am)

    This has nothing to do with the 2020 Karabakh War, you're linking an article from 2018. And there isn't a source saying Armenia made threats to strike Mingachevir Dam during the war, unlike the clear threats of Az Defense minister. Even your source from 2018 isn't talking about this supposed dam strike threat.

    Statement of the Vaqif Dargahli can not be included anywhere without appropriate background information. Otherwise, it will be misleading.

    What background information? That he was supposedly commenting on a nonexistent threat by Armenia, and that even in his own speech he doesn't mention any threats by Armenia? He never even said we'd only strike Metsamor power plant if Armenians attack our dam or otherwise set a precondition for such a strike;
    • "The Armenian side must not forget that our army's state-of-the-art missile systems allow us to strike the Metsamor nuclear plant with precision, which could lead to a great catastrophe for Armenia," Vagif Dargahli, the Azerbaijani Defense Ministry spokesman, said on July 16, hours after hostilities had resumed following a one-day lull.[4] ZaniGiovanni (talk) 17:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

🙏

@rosguill I don’t know ask who to help me! Please if you have time just publish it maybe master editors reject it! I don’t know what is wrong with that! That all the sources! And truth He has been published in TIME GUARDIAN GQ birirish L’Obs and...he deserve a article here! 3 member of global shaping called him the forefather Xxmadamex (talk) 22:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Coin Coin Chapter Three: River Run Thee and Talk:Russian occupation of Kherson Oblast on "All RFCs" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

NPP Drive Award

The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia   
This award is given to Rosguill for 610 reviews in the July NPP backlog reduction drive. Your contributions played a part in the 9895 reviews that took place during the drive. Thank you for your contributions. .Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 07:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Perhaps this will put you at ease after all the reviews you’ve been doing! CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 00:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for continuing to be awesome! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 15:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022

New Page Review queue August 2022

Hello Rosguill,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination
MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.
Open letter to the WMF
The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.
TIP - Reviewing by subject
Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.
New reviewers
The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.
Reminders
  • Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
  • If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
  • To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mary, mother of Jesus on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

NPP UBX

Hi. You may wish to add this to your user page: {{Wikipedia:New pages patrol/CoY userbox 2019}} Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Redirect Barnstar
Your diligent work in the area of reviewing redirects, redirect categorization and improvement is duly recognized and greatly appreciated. You are truly one of the unsung heroes of Wikipedia, and we hope you continue to enjoy your improvement of this awesome encyclopedia! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Review My New Articles

Hi Sorry To bother you can you review and mark as reviewed ? i made English articles of his person . thanks a lot

Mehrdad Asemani

Kiava (talk) 02:51, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't review articles on request. It will be reviewed when someone gets to it in the new pages queue. signed, Rosguill talk 15:12, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Beodizia

Hi @Rosguill: I think this editor should be autopatrolled. They've only been here two months and already written 15 articles with 600 odd edits, for example: Lea Niako. scope_creepTalk 16:05, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

scope_creep, I agree that most of their work is stellar, but I do see a few recent articles with maintenance tags, and the overall new-ness of the account makes me hesitant to approve advanced permissions. I'm going to hold off for now, but expect that they'll be an uncontroversial candidate if they keep up this pace for a few more months. signed, Rosguill talk 17:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

Hi please help me with draft: Bhumika Nanda Reang Bru120 (talk) 17:33, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The article has been nominated for deletion due to a perceived failure to meet notability guidelines. The best way to demonstrate notability is to provide the WP:THREE best examples of significant coverage (e.g. paragraphs or more of significant biographical information) in independent, secondary, reliable sources. Non-English sources are fine. If this standard cannot be met, no amount of editing will prevent the article from deletion. Additionally, please respond to the conflict-of-interest notice I left on your talk page before making any further edits. signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dallas Express (established 2021) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Template:Cite article

Hi Rosguill

Thank for closing[5]WP:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_August_3#Template:Cite_article. I have bypassed nearly all the redirects, in these 408 edits.

Only two pages still need updating, but I don't have permission to edit them:

  1. User:Plastikspork/citetools.js: note left[6] at User_talk:Plastikspork#User:Plastikspork/citetools.js
  2. WP:Cascade-protected items/content (transcluded in WP:Cascade-protected items: edit request posted[7] at WT:Cascade-protected_items#Protected_edit_request_on_14_August_2022

I reckon that it is now safe to delete the template. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Bitare (ward), Thank you!

Thank you very much for moving the Kitale Ward page! I have spent hours over multiple days trying to solve that page. Emailed a prof, and spoke to two people on Jamii Forums for help. I can not explain the headache and confusion it has been to solve (still not done, as have yet to find postal source to ref.) I wish I had been bold and moved it from start, but was afraid I would be wrong and move many times. Your move helps make it more clarity. I pray the hair I lost to the page is not permanent, but thank you again for moving it. Amani kwako, BevoLJ (talk) 10:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Karibu BevoLJ, best of luck to your hair. signed, Rosguill talk 15:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP Award

Redirect Ninja Master Award
For over 60,000 redirect reviews during 2021. Congratulations on being the first recipient of this award. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The New Page Reviewer's Silver Award

For over 2,000 article reviews during 2021. Well done! Keep up the good work! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't even know where the problem is

Can you please revert to my original version in the Ashina talkpage and have Hunan201p ask the third opinion. We can understand everything much clearer that way. All I know is Hunan201p doesn't my version of the edited page but I don't know where the problem is. I don't even know what the problem is suppose to be, not even the person who answered my third opinion answer. I answered everything and I don't know what the problem is. Huna201p doesn't even explain to me or made anything clear on the edit summary. What third opinion am I suppose to ask when I don't even know it myself. My last dispute ended in 28 May with me explaining everything to him. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ashina_tribe&diff=1090331605&oldid=1090326990 For 2 months he stopped and for 2 months I had my version of the page edited until 3rd of August https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ashina_tribe&action=history.

He just ignored our last discussion and started all these edit warring games. Hunan201p were blocked 3 months for and had multiple warnings for repeatedly edit warrning to the version that he prefers without explanation. How can I settle a dispute against a person who has no intention of explanining and just give a gibberish reason to reverting anything he wants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=958378105#Disruptive_editing_at_User_talk:Hunan201p
User:Steve Quinn said this "Hunan201p is now using his talk page to encourage 4 editors (by pinging them) to revert editon Wikipedia articles to his preferred version [195], [196]. Please see the top of that section for the pings. How this is done is - the pings are in conjunction with some gibberish about another editor and some IPs engaged in sock behavior and/or meat behavior on certain named Wikipedia pages. Hunan201p is doing all this under the banner of pointing out sock disruption and meat disruption, when in reality, the edits he to which he points are in agreement with guidelines and policies."
Here is why User:Deepfriedokra blocked Hunan201p. He said " I would like to point out that that sort aforementioned gibberish is the reason for the block. He also requested to be unblocked on WP:SPI, talk pages, and noticeboards. That seemed a silly thing to do, and this gibberish spewing just confirms that perception. @Hunan201p: I would like to point out that continuing this behavior after the current block ends will certainly result in a longer block. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 13:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC) "

I hope you understand my difficult situation, because I'm dealing with Hunan201p, a wikipedian with history of bad behaviour, the type who has no intention of explaining anything to you or to me.Ghizz Archus (talk) 15:47, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Respectfully, I think your description of the 3O request on the talk page played a more immediate role in its failure than Hunan201p's intransigence (and also note that you failed to actually list the discussion at WP:3O--I had to do that for you). I think that a more productive framing for the 3O request would be to present a case for why your additional information should be included, and ask editors to weigh in on that, something like I think we should add the following content based on...{{ping|Hunan201p}} disagrees, and I'd request that they provide their reasoning here for convenience and clarity. If there are long-term issues with Hunan201p's editing, you can open a case at WP:ANI. signed, Rosguill talk 16:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
I was pinged to this talk page. Ghizz Archus I recommend you follow the path laid out by Rosguill here and on the Ashina Tribe talk page here. Unfortunately you and Hunan201p were both edit warring for quite awhile before Rosguill intervened. So if you go to ANI chances are you will both be sanctioned. Try these other venues to solve the content disagreement and see how that goes. Rosguill is actually showing you a way to build consensus for your version of this article. Hope this helps. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Redirects and NPP

Hi, I've seen you around but I don't think we've interacted much other than the times you've reviewed some of my redirects. What I was going to ask is since I'm new to actually reviewing pages and I'm a bit unsure about if I'm on the right track here, if you could like go through what I have patrolled to make sure I'm not making a ton of mistakes. Because if there is something I'm doing wrong, I'd like to know now instead of finding out who knows how much later. I've mostly focused on redirects (~200 so I'm not sure how long that would take to go through). I'm asking you because you're one of the first people I think of that focuses on redirects. Any advice you have to offer would be appreciated. Clovermoss (talk) 18:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Clovermoss, I looked through a random smattering of your patrol log and everything looked ok so far. If you're looking for guidance, have you read WP:RPATROL? Otherwise, the only other advice I can give is to participate in RfD and build up a sense of which way redirect decisions tend to go (although if memory serves, you're already rather active there, so I'd just say you're on the right track). signed, Rosguill talk 19:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
It's nice to hear I'm on the right track in general... kind of relieving, actually. I thought I was, but it's good to know that's not a misperception on my part. I don't think I've read WP:RPATROL recently, but it does look familar so I likely stumbled across it at some point. Most of my NPP training at this point has focused on articles (although there's some CSD stuff I'm working on right now in regards to R2s).
I've participated in RfD a handful of times, some of them recently. I'm not sure if that's defined as rather active? I have created a lot of redirects though [8]. I had autopatrolled until I asked for it to be removed recently, so maybe I should go on the redirect autopatrol list again? I don't create a ton of redirects like I used to, but maybe my perception of what's typical is a bit off. Clovermoss (talk) 19:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022

Hello Rosguill,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022

Suggestions:

  • There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
  • Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
  • Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
  • This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Gender identity on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

NPP message

Hi Rosguill,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Copy/Page swap

I was reviewing redirects and found ONE on Prime Video 1 and ONE on Prime Video 1: Moraes vs. Johnson 2. One redirected to the other, and then the article and redirect were swapped by a cut/paste move. There was no attribution given; the edit history just showed a "removed redirect" edit summary when the content from the other article was added. I reverted both and left an edit summary saying this is not the right way to do a swap (I'm not even sure they should be swapped). Anyway, I looked at the contributions of User:HeinzMaster and it appears they did this with Peter Queally also. I don't know if there are more. They also have the NPP perm. MB 03:10, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Update: the user asked on my TP the right way to swap and I directed him to WP:RM. It look like he will try to do the one I reverted the right way now. MB 04:17, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Praxidicae

You wrote in the closing statement "I don't think that they're here in bad faith and don't see anything productive coming out of providing WP:ROPE."

My reading is that "providing WP:ROPE" means "give them another chance", so I wondered if you mistyped something. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I'm realizing you're right as far as the essay ROPE is concerned, but I was thinking more about the actual saying Give 'em enough rope, and they'll likely hang themselves, i.e. that providing rope will result in them saying something that will get themselves blocked. signed, Rosguill talk 14:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP Awards for 2020

The New Page Reviewer's Silver Award

For over 2,000 article reviews during 2020. Well done! Keep up the good work! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Redirect Ninja Master Award
For over 55,000 redirect reviews during 2020. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Here are 2 awards to show appreciation for the NPP reviews you did back in 2020. We realize this is late, but NPP fell behind in some coordination activities. We are just getting caught up. If you don't want to receive "old" barnstars, please just ignore this and reply to let us know not to send you any more. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hunan201p and Ghizz Archus

I just closed a DRN case and a Third Opinion case from these two. The problem is that these two editors have a strong antagonism that goes to the extent of one of them pursuing a useless sockpuppet vendetta. The content won't be resolved as long as they are feuding. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Pawan Singh Arora

@Rosguill I hope you are doing well! I am planning on creating an article on Pawan Singh Arora but then saw that it was previously created a few years ago but moved to draft namespace by you. I realize it has now been deleted from the draft namespace as well. Is it possible for you to reinstate the draft once again? I can take it from there. Thank you for you support in advance :) -- Satdeep Gill (talk • contribs 14:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hm, I don't think I was involved in moving it to draftspace--I have no recollection of the article and I don't show up in its edit history. At any rate, since it was only deleted due to abandonment, I've gone ahead and restored the draft at Draft:Pawan Singh Arora. signed, Rosguill talk 19:36, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Thank you @Rosguill! Seems like someone deleted it once again. I have put in a request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Thank you for your support! -- Satdeep Gill (talk • contribs 09:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you still review pages?

Hello, I am looking to get some pages reviewed. I recently began making pages again and a lot of the reviewers who used to review my pages are gone. Just hoping to get some pages reviewed. I am often making sports coaches pages. Thanks! Eibln (talk) 05:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, while I do review pages, I do not review them on request. signed, Rosguill talk 14:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
the knowledge of soviet/eastern bloc art and passion to maintaining a not often seen accuracy as to the history of said art is deeply appreciated The Meta Boi (talk) 01:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rosguill/Archive_31&oldid=1118841636"