Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Unreferenced BLP Rescue/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Next.....

I'm tempted to suggest either January or March, I sort of like the idea of trying to finish off the months preceding the BLPPROD deadline. But really, anything from 2010 is fine by me. --joe deckertalk to me 16:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Hajime Ishii (football manager)

Anyone who can speak any Japanese here at all? I'm certain this can be referenced, JPWIKI has a number of off-line references to baseball reference books that are appropriate, but I'm not comfortable simply copying them without being able to see what it is they reference. Moreover, I found it difficult to get through sources for this fellow because of the far more famous politican of the same name. Any assistance appreciated. --joe deckertalk to me 16:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I looked at him earlier and thought similarly. Nice work quoting WP:HOTTIE in the Smith prod nomination. Should be policy. The-Pope (talk) 16:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
We have those book references from the Japanese wiki, are they good enough? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I suspect they are, but I'd feel far more comfortable if I could actually verify that one of them was real and make a connection between the reference and what it allegedly references. --joe deckertalk to me 19:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry guys

Found a whole load of unreferenced BLPs. Marking them accordingly, as I feel better identified so can be dealt with. Short term effect is not encouraging of course as the total spikes up. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Yup, it happens--better to get 'em out in the open... C'est la vie! --joe deckertalk to me 00:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
How did you find them? Was it a database report or your own query/search? The-Pope (talk) 00:26, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Both, mainly the db report >>Wikipedia:Database reports/Possibly unreferenced biographies of living people<< as still having issues getting own query going. Basically that list above should be almost empty and 95% of things on there I could mark with {{unreferencedBLP}}, some others checked are Wikipedia:Database_reports/Biographies_of_living_people_possibly_eligible_for_deletion, Wikipedia:Database_reports/Completely_unreferenced_biographies_of_living_people_(newest) and User:AlexNewArtBot/URTBLPSearchResult. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest a quick side-trip before we tackle the next month...

If you look here, you'll find that there actually are a few unref'd BLPs that were marked unref'd on March 18, 2010 -- only because they got unmarked and marked again. It's about 100, and based on the first 10 or so, they're mostly easy pickins'. Anyone game for putting the list Hut made there to bed? --joe deckertalk to me 02:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!  :) --joe deckertalk to me 22:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
First item that I tackle on the list turns out to be Gary Pearson. It's weird because I am actually a fan of his, and used to go see the Chumps at the Big City Improv doing their Star Trek spoofs and improv shows. Gary Pearson was hilarious as William Shatner playing James T, Kirk. I also got to go on stage during one performance where the audience was being dragged up to play various bit parts. I was Alexander Rozhenko. What a coincidence. -- Whpq (talk) 14:26, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
There are actually two left: Richard Daniel Roman, where a PROD was removed, and Eloy Monrouzeau which seems to have been missed for some reason. Hut 8.5 12:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Both at AfD, now. Haven't looked at the former yet (it was already at AfD when I got here), the latter I found a single passing RS for, but perhaps there more info hiding somewhere. --joe deckertalk to me 14:35, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Roman is a borderline notable music producer/writer in the Latin music scene. No article on es.wiki and I always think that non-performers need to have won awards, not just writen/produced songs for others, even if they are notable songs by wiki standards. Links in the article show that he exists and has writen/produced songs, but I don't think it's enough. The deprodder was interesting... first edit was the deprod, never seen that before. The-Pope (talk) 15:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I suspect it's that change to email all users when their talk page is changed. Presumably your notification of the prod would have sent the creator an email, and if he couldn't remember his username/password he might create a new account to remove the prod. Hut 8.5 16:02, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Whats left

Joe made the comment that 2% of the remaining articles are Voice actors. So I thought I'd see what the other 98% are. All based on category trees, that aren't perfect, and it will add to more than 100% if people are in multiple cats, especially musicians and actors are generally also in entertainers.

Any other cats you think are common? The-Pope (talk) 11:07, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

A bit of levity

So not a BLP....The Delicious One.--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:53, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh my god, if that were a BLP, the crotch-grabbing incident would totally be a BLP violation. :p (Darn, that was the girl, not TDO. Ah well.) --joe deckertalk to me 17:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Some other silly examples: [1] [2] [3] Hut 8.5 18:17, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
OK fun's over, everyone back to battle stations! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:10, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
OK, but only after noticing that Taco Bell [5] got jealous.... --joe deckertalk to me 04:13, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

More uBLPs found

Mr.Z-bot has recently marked up another 200 uBlps. Seems they where marked as unreferenced and also as living people. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Boo. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 14:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

More new URBLPs, but...

It looks like this time (unless they come in two groups), this new batch is only around 65-70 articles. --joe deckertalk to me 01:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

A tough one...

I reluctantly sent LaFarr Stuart to AfD but would love to see someone find a source for this one... J04n(talk page)

Yeah. A couple references to involvement in the computer language Forth, which I expect is the same person, but nothing particularly solid there. I wish the archives for the magazine "Byte" were still on-line. --joe deckertalk to me 00:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Dropped a note on the Computing Wikiproject's talk page. Couldn't hurt. --joe deckertalk to me 00:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

What a pretty sight

Under 1000 left and all of 2010 are gone. Massive qudos to joe decker, your a legend joe! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:23, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Aww, thanks, but all the folks working at WP:URBLP, WP:URBLPR and related projects have gotten us this far. One lap left! --joe deckertalk to me 03:39, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I've been having a sniff around other related cats and noticed that BLPs are back-to-front compared to other cats on problems with sourcing. On the articles side we have:

But on the BLP side we have:

So the "lacking sources" cat means the opposite for BLPs than it does for other articles. Luckily, it's (I think) a fairly easy task to align them, as it's all done through the templates, not changing 1000s of articles. I think the BLP sources tags should be put in a new Category:BLP articles needing additional references cat, but I think that we should leave {{BLP unsourced}} and the iconic Category:Unreferenced BLPs as is and just delete Category:BLP articles lacking sources. Opinions? And where should this discussion be taken to make it happen and get a wider audience, as I doubt many will be watching {{BLP sources}}'s talk page and Category talk:BLP articles lacking sources is still a redlink! The-Pope (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

If you want to delete or rename a category then the place to have the discussion is WP:CFD. Posting at WP:BLP/N might get people to look at the issue. Hut 8.5 15:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Starting a discussion at WP:CFD seems like a good idea. My present view is the the BLP/unreferenced categories are not layed out in any logical way so the result they are unusable for some purposes. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:10, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
One issue is that {{Unreferenced section}} is categories the same as {{Unreferenced}}, so that articles that have cat:Living person and Cat:Unreferenced cannot be identified as an unreferenced BLP because it may only apply to a section! Because of that much effort is wasted with zBot and others to look through them. When if fully unreferenced and section unreferenced was simply categoried seperately it would be easy to find them. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

James Seng

Would appreciate another pair of eyes on this one. Article is littered with refs, so I've down-graded it to a "BLP sources" tag but I feel there's something odd about it. Most of the refs used are either by the subject or derived from one of his companies. On a quick search, I'm not finding anything to support the status accorded to the subject by the text. My antennae are twitching. Normally, I would dig into this and deal with it one way or the other but I've got to go to work now and have to leave it.--CharlieDelta (talk) 06:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

  • The GigaOM article cite is a legitimate source, so the tag change to BLP-sources is good in my view. As to actual notability, your antennae are rightly twitching. We have tons of blps like this lurking around, created circa 2005, of internet/computer field mid-level people of questionable notability. I might have added a notability tag to this one, for example, as some of the claims if better sourced might make a better case for notability. Someday hopefully soon we'll have eliminated the uBLP backlog (can we ever actually get to zero? For 1 minute, maybe? I dunno). Some future projects could include going through all the "BLP sources" articles, and all the "BLP IMDB sources" articles.--Milowent • talkblp-r 12:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
    • What a coincidence. I had looked at the article and it looked a bit dubious, and a quick scan didn't pan out so I was going to look at is some more later. I'll see if I can add more sources, but the claims for notability are little weak. -- Whpq (talk) 13:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
      • And after some searching about, the sense I get is that he is a capable technologist who has written for tech magazines, worked on various startups, involved himself with various standards committees, and been quoted in the press, but has not actually had any signficant coverage about him. I've tagged the page with {{notability}}. -- Whpq (talk) 13:21, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  • ICANN ref sealed it for me. He may not be notable but it has a reliable source. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

H. M. Khoja

There's a lot of stuff that's named after H. M. Khoja, but no sources about him. I've dropped a note at Wikiproject Pakistan asking for help. Anybody able to better than draw a blank like I did? -- Whpq (talk) 18:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 next, I presume?

I assume we should just keep rolling on?--Milowent • talkblp-r 15:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure, why not? -- Whpq (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm in! Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 16:09, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Multiple numbers

Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or just a train about to run us over?

Currently the BRB (big red button) or Category:All unreferenced BLPs is about 140 lower than the total of the months, as shown in the box on the right of our main page. This is because articles marked with WP:BLPPROD are added to the monthly cat, but not the All unreferenced BLPs cat, unless a separate {{BLP unsourced}} tag is added as well. Should we "fix" this? The argument against doing so is that they are on death row already, so why worry. The argument for is to have a single number, rather than a mix. As we get smaller, this BLPPROD only group becomes more significant, as it's always around 100-150 articles.

There is also a strange bug of there actually being 10-20 more articles listed in Category:All unreferenced BLPs than what the PAGESINCATEGORY total indicates! Maybe a lag issue, but quite strange.

On a slightly related link, I think that there are about 100-200 articles marked with {{ unreferenced}}, not {{BLP unreferenced}}, but in the Category:Living people cat. Some have the "unreferenced section" bug as mentioned by Suncreator above, but some are definitely mistagged, so I might do a sweep through them soon, which will bump up the numbers again. The-Pope (talk) 01:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Unreferenced BLPs progress box currently shows 699, that figure is correct. It puzzles me how the BRB is different but it's not easy to work out how either of the figures are worked out. Can a Unreferenced BLPs be listed in two categories somehow? Hopefully as the figures get smaller it will become more obvious what is going on. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 12:45, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The BRB is from the {approximate) count of pages in Category:All unreferenced BLPs - currently it says at the top of the category page: "Pages in category "All unreferenced BLPs"; The following 200 pages are in this category, out of 553 total." But hit "next 200" a couple of times and it says "The following 161 pages are in this category", indicating that there are actually 561 pages. The 699 includes BLPPRODed articles that don't have the separate {{BLP unreferenced}} template. The code for BLPPROD puts it in the Category:Unreferenced BLPs from September 2011 but not in Category:All unreferenced BLPs. That is also why Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/uBLPs 2011 09 has only 120 articles in it, but Category:Unreferenced BLPs from September 2011 has over 220. ie: Alexandru Barna only has the BLPPROD tag, not the BLP unreferenced tag, so is in the September cat but not in the All cat. Adrian Horvat, however, has both a BLPPROD and the BLP unreferenced tag, so is in both. It seems that {{Prod blp/dated}} is only semi-protected, so I think I might try to allign the two. It doesn't really make sense to include some BLPPRODs, but not others.The-Pope (talk) 14:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
"The 699 includes BLPPRODed articles" - nope. BLPPRODed article are not included unless they are marked with BLP unsourced as well. You can get to the 699 figure by adding up each individual month +1 for Undated articles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:21, 11 September 2011 (UTC) unsure now. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:27, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Seen you just now changed [[tlx|Prod blp/dated}} getting closer :) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Categorisation here really wants sorting out it's such a mess! Most of the problems are with the templates where the majority of the categorisation done but as an after thought with most templates are locked. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Being able to edit protected templates and the slowness of the edit protected system is one of the few things that actually makes me think I should run the RfA gauntlet.The-Pope (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
My take is the categorisation relationships should be seperated from the templates, so {{unreferenced}} would add a category Category:Unreferenced, {{unreferenced section}} would add Category:Unreferenced section, {{BLP unsourced}} adds Category:Unreferenced etc, then how the categories all relate to parents categories such as Category:All unreferenced BLPs can be done on the unprotected category pages. I think first will be a WP:CFD. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
My reading of the unreferenced template code is that if a {{Unreferenced|section|date=September 2011}} is added, then it is added to the "needs more refs" cats, but if they do a {{Unreferenced|section, except for a single ref|date=September 2011}} then the text in the box look nice, but the coding doesn't detect it as being for a section. My assessment of the oldest 20 articles of the 202 unreferenced articles with living people cats, is that most have refs or external links and should be refimproved, not unreferenced.The-Pope (talk) 15:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I think you mean {{BLP sources}}, BLPs would be best indicated as a BLP. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
A whole range of things on these article but the most common is a source that doesn't appear to be reliable. What is appropriate thing to do in such a case? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:10, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Red linked cat explosion

A change was made to {{BLP unsourced section}} that has added almost 1000 articles to the list. Can a UBLP aware admin please revert it until consensus is gained. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 01:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Category problem again, on a permanently protected template. Glad I'm not an admin because this makes them look incompetent. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Glad to see that fixed, I assumed something was wrong when several articles had sources already. On an unrelated note, why isn't Sebeca Zahra Hussain deleted yet? Cheers Tooga - BØRK! 11:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
That article's AfD was removed from a daily log at some point by accident. I've relisted it under today, it'll be closed in a week. Hut 8.5 13:53, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
It hasn't been fixed yet but temporary undo(ne) until discussion is completed. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:14, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hundreds more Unreferenced BLP, plus many more

Added {{BLP unsourced}} to a many BLPs today, mostly the ones identified by WP:Database reports. Later found hundreds more in Category:Government and politics articles needing translation from Dutch Wikipedia. Started to tag those but only touched the surface for now. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I've been asked to tag them up but I may not get to it for a while. It's not all of the articles, some have a source of some type that would mean that it's not suitable to tag hence they all require manually checking. I made a short list yesterday(last thing), here is it.
  1. Ad de Boer
  2. Anneke van Dok-van Weele
  3. Annelies Verstand
  4. Annie Schreijer-Pierik
  5. Arie Pais
  6. Aucke van der Werff
  7. Bert Groen
  8. Bob van den Bos
  9. Cees van Bruchem
  10. Clémence Ross-van Dorp
  11. Cornelis Visser
  12. Dick Dees
  13. Dick Schutte
  14. Dick Stellingwerf
  15. Ed Nijpels
  16. Erwin Nypels
  17. Evert van Milligen
  18. Felix Rottenberg
  19. Filip van As
  20. Friso de Zeeuw
  21. Geke Faber
  22. Gerrit Oosting
  23. Gerrit Ybema
  24. Hans de Boer (Christian Democratic Appeal)
  25. Harry Wijnschenk
  26. Henk Visser
  27. Hubert Fermina
  28. Ineke Lambers-Hacquebard
  29. Inez Pijnenburg
  30. Jaap Boersma
  31. Jan Baas (Labour Party)
  32. Jan Bank
  33. Jan Cremers
  34. Jan Rijpstra
  35. Joke Kersten
  36. Joop Post
  37. Joost Möller
  38. Jos van Kemenade
  39. Jos van Rey
  40. Karina Content
  41. Leonard Geluk
  42. Liesbeth Tuijnman
  43. Loek Hermans
  44. Maarten Schakel Jr.
  45. Marijke van Haaren
  46. Melis van de Groep
  47. Milo Schoenmaker
  48. Nell Ginjaar-Maas
  49. Nico Verlaan
  50. Oene Sierksma
  51. Piet Bukman
  52. Piet van Zeil
  53. Pieter Beelaerts van Blokland
  54. Rinus Houtman
  55. Robin Linschoten
  56. Roelf de Boer
  57. Rosita van Gijlswijk
  58. Ruud Luchtenveld
  59. Stefanie van Vliet
  60. Steven de Vreeze
  61. Sybilla Dekker
  62. Tineke Netelenbos
  63. Tom Pitstra
  64. Tymon de Weger
  65. Willem Vermeend
  66. Wim Dik
  67. Wim Meijer (Labour Party)
  68. Wim Meijer (Pacifist Socialist Party)
  69. Winnie Sorgdrager
  70. Yvonne van Rooy

Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:46, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah yes, Dr. Blofeld's unsourced article dumps - the gift that keeps on giving! Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 13:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I haven't created an "unsourced BLP" in years. And there are far worse problems on wikipedia than unsourced short BLPs anyway..♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I realize these are from 2009, which is why I stated "the gift that keeps on giving" since it's been years that these unsourced sub-stubs have sat unattended. It would be a fantastic help, since you admit they are a problem, if you could go through and start sourcing them yourself? Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 14:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I have begun helping source them yes and I will find time to expand a few of them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
All tagged as BLP unsourced now. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm getting a sense others language translations will be found: Albinas Januška, Bertil Johansson (politician) so far. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Try Category:Centre Party (Sweden) politicians. Looks the trial obviously didn't work any admin here can go through Centre Party politicians and delete any bio created by myself as a db-bio from back in March 2009, its no loss given that the Swedish wiki articles are mostly stubs anyway. As long as no expanded articles is deleted. The Dutch and Lithuanian though are worth keeping.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


Checking 30,000 articles in Category:Articles needing translation from foreign-language Wikipedias and subcategories. These are ones found so far. Have not tagged them yet.

  1. Albinas Januška
  2. Algirdas Kumža
  3. Annie Beustes
  4. Åsa-Britt Karlsson
  5. Audrius Rudys
  6. Bedrettin Yıldızeli
  7. Benedicto Pozuelos Gil
  8. Bertil Johansson (politician)  Done
  9. Bertil Jonasson  Done
  10. Börje Hörnlund  Done
  11. Burkhard Jung
  12. Carol Zardetto
  13. Charles Pidjot
  14. Christian Attersee
  15. Claes Elmstedt
  16. Dick Ukeiwé
  17. Doris Gunnarsson
  18. Dušan Bavdek I don't think "Source:Slovenian wikipedia" counts.
  19. Édgar Brenes
  20. Elving Andersson
  21. Éric Babin
  22. Éric Gay
  23. Erik A. Eriksson
  24. Eva Hellstrand
  25. Everhardt Franßen
  26. Fernando Asián
  27. Fernando Jurado Noboa
  28. Fredrik Bojerud
  29. Gabriel Salazar
  30. Georges Naturel
  31. Gerda Antti
  32. Gintarė Adomaitytė
  33. Gisela Kessler
  34. Henri Naisseline
  35. Ingbritt Irhammar
  36. Irena Andriukaitienė
  37. Isabelle Champmoreau
  38. Iwar Arnstad
  39. Jean-Claude Briault
  40. Jean Lèques
  41. Joannis Avramidis
  42. Jonas Liaučius
  43. Jonas Mačys
  44. Jonas Pangonis
  45. Jonas Prapiestis
  46. Jöran Hägglund  Done
  47. José Luis Fernández Alonso
  48. Josef Brunner (MdB)

Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

  1. Julio Maragall
  2. Jürgen Kühling
  3. Karin Graßhof
  4. Katarina Erlingson
  5. Kazimieras Saja
  6. Kristina Jonäng
  7. Lars-Ivar Ericson
  8. Laureano Albán
  9. Leonas Apšega
  10. Lionel Cherrier
  11. Loek Bos - This one has a reference of sorts.
  12. Louis Kotra Uregei
  13. Māra Zālīte
  14. Marianne Devaux
  15. Mariví Ugolino
Some more. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

More

  1. Martine Faure
  2. Narciso Debourg
  3. Néko Hnepeune
  4. Nidoïsh Naisseline
  5. Nils-Eric Gustafsson
  6. Olle Eriksson
  7. Ona Danutė Buivydaitė
  8. Pascal Vittori
  9. Paul Néaoutyine
  10. Per Ankersjö  Done
  11. Philippe Briand
  12. Pietro Magni (footballer)
  13. Povilas Varanauskas
  14. Reidar Carlsson
  15. Rimantas Dichavičius
  16. Robert Xowie
  17. Roberto Spinosa
  18. Stanislovas Gediminas Ilgūnas
  19. Stig Josefson  Done
  20. Sylvie Robineau
  21. Tina Wunderlich
  22. Vaclovas Krutinis
  23. Valerijonas Šadreika
  24. Vidmantas Žiemelis
  25. Virgilijus Kačinskas
  26. Vito Žuraj
  27. Vladas Terleckas
  28. Vladimiras Beriozovas
  29. Zinaida Irutė Dargienė

Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:39, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

All tagged or in one case so far has a reference. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:52, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
  1. Alain Dolium
  2. Bernadette Malgorn
  3. Bertil Fiskesjö  Done
  4. Bram Stemerdink
  5. Bruno Joncour
  6. Caroline Cayeux
  7. Dariusz Zakrzewski
  8. François Bonneau
  9. François Doubin
  10. Franz-Josef Kemper
  11. Hirotaka Okada
  12. Jacques Bigot
  13. Jean-Paul Bachy
  14. Laurent Beauvais
  15. Manfred Schüler
  16. Michel Fanget
  17. Nicolas Moreau (actor)
  18. Olivier Henno
  19. Per-Ola Eriksson  Done
  20. René Revol
  21. Rodolphe Thomas
  22. Sébastien Jumel
  23. Thea de Roos-van Rooden
  24. Yoshimi Masaki
  25. Yuko Inoue
  26. Yvette Laclé

Above list found from articles with {{translation/ref}} on Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:55, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

  1. Gen MacManiman
  2. Geoffrey Tyler
  3. Greg Grossman
  4. Hugh Feeney
  5. Iain Pears
  6. Jack Fischel
  7. James Olthuis
  8. John Kurzweg
  9. Lawrence Weiskrantz
  10. Linh Chi
  11. Lucos Cozza
  12. Malcolm Crook
  13. Marcos Martín
  14. Nils Jernsletten
  15. Ole Henrik Magga
  16. Paul Connolly (music publisher)
  17. Peter Lloyd (illustrator)
  18. Regna Darnell
  19. Şevket Pamuk
  20. Shizuteru Ueda
  21. Steve J. Langdon
  22. Tim Jackson

Above list are bio stubs. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Ashleeeeeee.....

Someone willing to take a stab at saving Ashlee Crews? She's the last of the C's from this month, and there's gotta be something I can verify about her, really, right? Really? --joe deckertalk to me 05:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I've sourced it, it's just a naming problem. Hut 8.5 10:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks!  :) --joe deckertalk to me 06:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

The Final Countdown?

No, not the big hair 80s song, but is this the last month that we can attack? Whilst the lack of being able to set up a "start list" or "start number" isn't a fatal flaw, I think it does make this project unworkable as a series of "set tasks". Also I just noticed that this project isn't actually named as a WikiProject! Not sure if that's a problem, but I think that once Sept is done, then it should all be moved over to a sub-task of the original WP:URBLP project. Or should we just leave it all as is and stick a giant "Job Done" label (would be insensitive/too political/too US-centric (remember I'm an Aussie) to use a cropped version of File:USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) Mission Accomplished.jpg, or does the connotation of "it's done, but still ongoing" actually fit this task very well!) The-Pope (talk) 02:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

We should certainly celebrate ... but yeah, it'll always be on-going. Hopefully just less work! (And I'd love to have that celebration by a month from tomorrow (I'm in the US, so I mean the 25th, as that'll be a fairly significant birthday for me.) --joe deckertalk to me 04:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Yay! But yeah, the structure of this project isn't suited to working on current material. I would say that what is needed is something more like a new BLP page patrol which can review and deal with newly tagged BLPs as they occur. But in any case, cheers to all! -- Whpq (talk) 15:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Congrats to all, this has been an extremely successful project! Back in January 2010, the BLP mass deletion greatly disturbed me, which ultimately led to the creation of this month-by-month project. We've gotten rid of some chaff, effectively patrolled well over 20,000 BLPs for any concerns, and ultimately made a measurable improvement to Wikipedia as a whole. I think Pope's suggestion to fold this into WP:URBLP going forward probably makes sense, at least once we finish the September 2011 category.--Milowent • talkblp-r 15:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
    ...or when we really hit "everything left is at deletion", not sure we'll get there before October 1st (I'm gone for about ten days starting Thursday), but soon enough, yeah. I couldn't agree more with everything you've said, the work we've done here, all of us, has made a real difference to the encyclopedia. Bravo! --joe deckertalk to me 06:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I certainly haven't been able to contribute as much as I would like, but kudos to everyone who made this happen. It appeared to many naysayers to be an insurmountable task at the beginning, yet here were are. Bartender, a round for everybody! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 15:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
This round's on me.
Ponyo: I've been saving this image reference since you placed it on my user talk page a couple years back (or, at least, I think it was you!), I think it's time to share. --joe deckertalk to me 17:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Yup, that was me. I have to admit I was somewhat hoping you might keep a bit of the good stuff around for just such an occasion! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 15:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
I couldn't resist this. Hut 8.5 19:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Ha!!! --joe deckertalk to me 17:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Depreciated parameters

We've suddenly got a bunch of old months pop up again, thanks to someone discovering that BLPunreferenced as a parameter in the {{multiple issues}} template wasn't actually showing up correctly as a BLP unsourced. I never actually saw the movie, but I remember the song.The-Pope (talk) 14:31, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't even believe it.

You folks are incredible!

I'm just shaking my head in disbelief, I'm not entirely sure I ever thought we'd get here. --joe deckertalk to me 16:55, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Wow! It was a tough slog, especially those hurlers. But we did it! Cheers to all!

Cheers to all on a job well done!
So, about 20 months after the proverbial hit the fan, we've done it. Peter H. Thomas goes down in history as the last of the backlog to be cleared. Of course, there will be more tagged tomorrow, and next week and next month, but I am proud of all of you who helped out. I honestly thought that a "topic" based approach would work, but in the end there were just too many topics and not enough people interested in most of them and the month by month, letter by letter approach here, especially Joe's incredible consistancy and hard work, paid off. I wonder if we'll get any well dones from outside of this project, or just a "you've just moved the problem elsewhere", "you took 12 months too long" or "UBLPs aren't the real problem anyway"! When Australia won the America's Cup in 1983 they released a beer called Swan Premium Lager that had a commercial with a song along the lines of "They said you'd never make it, but you finally came through, for all of you who've made it, this one's made for you." Pretty sure they don't make it anymore, but guys, this one's for you! Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Going forward

What should be the direction going forward? I read a suggestion somewhere to focus on BLP's with risky words and make sure they are sourced, NPOV etc. IS anyone interested in this? I could perhaps scan BLPS with WP:AWB for set risky words. Is that of interest to anyone? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

  • It might be worth a try. Are these sorts of edits not already caught by vandalism bots? I don't have much familiarity with how those work. Another thought I had -- I wonder if there is a way to see which of the 50,000+ articles in Category:BLP articles lacking sources are the most popular articles (by daily/monthly viewcount)? It could help pinpoint popular BLPs that are in bad shape source-wise.--Milowent • talkblp-r 19:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Good job!

[7] Tijfo098 (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

not a good edit, almost as bad as creating a duplicate article and then instead of redirecting it, sticking merge tags on it. The-Pope (talk) 17:34, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Call for a Cleanup Drive!

Jezebel's Ponyo has alerted us that Category:Unreferenced BLPs has grown in the 4.5 years since we cleared the backlog. The current count is 3,194 (though Joe Decker already knocked out a 100 of them), a mere fraction of what we accomplished originally, but definitely worth a cleanup drive! I hope you can join us. I'd suggest we start from the oldest listed month (currently Category:Unreferenced BLPs from August 2014) and work our way up!--Milowent • hasspoken 19:53, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Let's roll! --joe deckertalk 19:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Count me in. -- Whpq (talk) 21:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Looks like the band is back together! --J04n(talk page) 23:32, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
I've also noticed it had grown and have cleaned a few lately. But I'm still not ready to give up on the topic based cleanup strategy! The cleanup bot includes URBLPs in its weekly lists such as https://tools.wmflabs.org/bambots/cwb/bycat/Olympics.html#Unreferenced BLPs. The full list of included projects is here, The-Pope (talk) 04:51, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Project #42 - August 2014

Tracker page for the August 2014 BLPs is now up at Wikipedia:Unreferenced BLP Rescue/August 2014. My memory of how it all worked is a bit foggy so please feel free to fix any mistakes. -- Whpq (talk) 06:37, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Project #43 - September 2014

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Unreferenced_BLP_Rescue/Archive_5&oldid=1237427954"