User talk:Slashme/Archive 10

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

Wikidata weekly summary #326

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of 7400-series integrated circuits. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Commented. --Slashme (talk) 11:02, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for reviewing the various redirects I created and, from the looks of it, reviewing many others! It's a crucial task for protecting the encyclopedia and your contributions there help do so. —Nøkkenbuer (talkcontribs) 13:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, that's a very nice gesture, and makes my day a little better :-) --Slashme (talk) 13:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar

Thanks for your recent work reviewing new articles and redirects. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 01:16, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #327

A kitten for you!

I love Kittys

Dudleyman360 (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Cuteness for the win! --Slashme (talk) 09:30, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

RoboM

SLASH_mini_me
hi... testing LairdUnlimited 15:45, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Dafuq? --Slashme (talk) 09:33, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:TerraCycle

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:TerraCycle. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Covered well enough by other users by now. --Slashme (talk) 09:35, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #328

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
this is a belated thank you note for your kind review of tommy_gregory_thompson, a fugitive and treasure hunter of our modern time. best regards LairdUnlimited 10:28, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #329

Wikidata weekly summary #330

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello Slashme, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news
As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.
Other
Moving to Draft and Page Mover
  • Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
  • If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
  • Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
  • The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
  • The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.
List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

  • Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget.
  • In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions.
  • MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues.
  • User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page)
  • User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50).
  • User:Primefac/revdel.js(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you.
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link.
  • User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion.
  • User:Evad37/rater.js(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Human evolution

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Human evolution. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #331

Wikidata weekly summary #332

Please comment on Talk:Foursquare

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Foursquare. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Skipping this one due to lack of time --Slashme (talk) 07:55, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #333

Wikidata weekly summary #334

Please comment on Talk:Sci-Hub

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sci-Hub. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Slashme, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal
Project updates
  • ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
  • There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.
New scripts

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #335

Wikidata weekly summary #336

Wikidata weekly summary #337

You've got mail

Hello, Slashme. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 00:45, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #338

NORG vs. GNG

Hey, I saw you marked Unifly as reviewed and commented in an edit summary that subject-specific guidelines are irrelevant because it passes GNG. While I understand that that is generally the case for subjects where the SSGs are generally more lenient and/or completely different from GNG (such as WP:MUSICBIO or WP:NACADEMIC), WP:NORG is somewhat unique in that the guidelines are actually stricter than GNG. This seems like a contradiction of sorts–if NORG is stricter than GNG, but GNG takes precedence, when is there ever a scenario where NORG is actually applied? NORG is actually a guideline, unlike some other subject-specific notability pages which are essays, which seems to indicate that it has been thoroughly vetted by the community and would appear to thus considered useful and applicable. Could you clear this up for me? signed, Rosguill talk 14:35, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rosguill, my understanding of subject-specific guidelines is that they exist to provide a basis for a presumption of notability. If a subject passes that guideline, it's probably notable even if you can't immediately find multiple independent reliable sources, so you should hold off on deletion discussions until there's good evidence that it's not notable. The GNG is the ultimate test of a subject's notability, though. If there is any topic that is discussed in detail in multiple, independent, reliable sources, it's notable, no matter what the subject specific guideline says.
NORG follows the GNG, as explained in this section, but there's a strong emphasis on the quality of the sources, because there are so many run-of-the-mill companies that are not really notable, but there is a strong commercial interest from COI editors to get them on Wikipedia, so a lenient subject-specific guideline would mean that we can't clean them up quickly.
I must admit that I haven't done a thorough review of the sources to check their quality and depth. I'll start a review on the talk page now, and if it comes up lacking, we can take the article to AFD.
By the way, your style of communication is exemplary! --Slashme (talk) 17:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
OK, I've gone about a third of the way through the list of refs, and I'm comfortable that there are multiple, independent, reliable sources that cover the subject in depth, so I'll stop now. I'm confident that the article as it stands would survive AFD, but as always, I'm open to other points of view. --Slashme (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Slashme,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
  • Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.
If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.
We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.
With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #339

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Slashme. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

I voted, thanks! --Slashme (talk) 19:31, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Parliament diagram tool

Your diagram tool is absolutely amazing, but is there any way that you could put some language in there to discourage uploading testing / joking / (non-notable) fictional diagrams to Commons? It would also be worthwhile to prompt users to enter the name of the country, locality, body, and year, then suggest a filename based on that. That way there will be consistent names, making it more easy to find images. There are some like File:2018election.svg that might be real or might be somebody's test/joke, but it's not named so we have no idea. You could have something like this:

( ) This is a test image or an image for my personal use (if they pick this radio button, then the filename is hardcoded as File:My_Parliament.svg and the user cannot change it)
( ) This image is for an actual real-world legislative body or a notable work of fiction and I wish to upload it to Commons
Year ______________________________
Country ___________________________
Locality __________________________
Parliament/Body name ______________ (e.g. "House of Commons" or "Senate")
Suggested filename Year Country (Locality) Body.svg

Anyway - it's a great tool and I just thought I'd offer this suggestion. Thanks. --B (talk) 19:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

That's an excellent suggestion. I don't have time to implement it this week, but maybe over the weekend or as soon as I have the time and the energy :-/
If you'd like to, you can add it as a feature request on GitHub, or if you aren't a GitHub user, I can add the feature request for you. --Slashme (talk) 20:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Actually, after looking at the number of test images that have been uploaded, I really need to do this fix! I'll do it over the weekend. I think I'll make it so that if at least the title and year are not filled in, they cannot upload it anywhere except My_Parliament. I can maybe also use the information to build a description for the file. Thanks again for the suggestion, B! --Slashme (talk) 21:10, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm not on GitHub - though I have just recently started using git at work. --B (talk) 01:25, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
OK, I've just logged it as issue #52 on GitHub. --Slashme (talk) 20:58, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi B, I've just made the changes. Please test it and give me your feedback.

I removed the scary warning when the user is trying to upload over the default test filename, because I think that might have motivated some people to upload under a different name instead.

I didn't go with radio buttons, and rather put the warning text right on the button that creates the upload link, but I think that's clear enough. --Slashme (talk) 15:57, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #340