Batagur baska

Welcome!

Hi Batagur baska! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing!

From Fahads1982 on 27 October 2023 (thanked).

Saving this thread for useful links.

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

  Sent by Novem Linguae on 27 December 2023.

Hi, Novem Linguae. Thank you very much for this. I'm sure it will be useful and I'll be glad to help out. Best wishes for 2024. (Sent same day.)

Saving this thread for useful links.

Please stop

Hello, Batagur baska,

I had to rollback a lot of your edits because you created 64 broken redirect articles that would have otherwise been deleted. For some reason, you redirected existing articles and pointed them all at non-existent pages. This created broken redirects and those pages are deleted by an admin or on of our bots. If you want to redirect an article, please don't make mass changes and also ALWAYS point them towards an existing target article, not to a blank page. While we are encouraged to "Be Bold", this kind of mass mistake can result in valid pages being mistakenly deleted so please don't rush through projects like this without checking your work. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Liz. My apologies. I am redirecting a large number of permanent stubs to help WP:CRIC. I was going to create the target lists next, but I had to break off because something urgent came up. I should be able to finish the task tomorrow. In future, I'll create the targets first. Sorry again for inconvenience caused. Batagur baska (talk) 19:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Just so you can see what happened, here is a link to what I saw. By the way, I think it's okay to redirect articles, just point them towards existing pages. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I see what you mean. These bots do a good job. Well, I learned something today. Thanks, Liz. Batagur baska (talk) 19:53, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Identifying non-stubs and reclassifiying

What criterion are you using? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Kindly explain your problem in detail, so that I can understand what you are talking about, and use words like "please". For example, do you require only a single criterion? Okay? Batagur baska (talk) 07:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

This edit was what originally caught my attention. Believe it or not, I was trying to be nice. I had wondered if perhaps you thought it was not a stub because of the existence of the "Career" section. I have since checked your contributions to find that you have been using AWB to reassess stubs into start class without due diligence. There is no reason why you should be making mistakes like this one if you were conducting the most cursory of checks before saving. So, please go back and fix those AWB edits of yours. You've changed dozens of articles; they should all be rechecked manually. Please do not start new AWB tasks before you have done so. And please do not make careless mass edits using AWB in the future. Thanks! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I also noticed that you have recently redirected dozens of articles at rates of multiple per minute. I can only hope that you'd made lists and checked each one thoroughly beforehand. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:19, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Looks like Gurung got into the wrong list so I've redirected it now. Sorry I'm not 100% perfect. If you wish to revert any of the redirects then please do so, but that is likely to mean they will go to WP:AFD. As for my criteria (plural), I am trying to help WP:CRIC resolve its massive stub issue and, as a rule of thumb (with due allowance for borderline cases), it seems reasonable to keep cricket biographies of at least 3.5kb size and move them out of the stub categories in case they are hit by the forthcoming cricket stub cull. The best way to do that is to remove the bio-stub template and reset class=stub to class=start. As this is a long-term process, many of them may be reset as genuine stubs once the so-called "microstubs" are out of the way. Kamal Singh Airee, by the way, is 4.2kb and I noted that it has scope for expansion, which is the case with all that have been moved from stub to start. Obviously, as with any major exercise of this type, there will be a few errors but redirects do not lose their histories — if these articles go to AFD, on the other hand, they might well be deleted.

In future, if you think you might have an issue about something, a polite request would be appreciated per WP:CIVIL. Like the majority of editors who are endeavouring to improve their projects, I do not appreciate abrupt demands which are close to breaching WP:AGF. Also, I notice in your editing statistics that a massive 8.7% of your edits have been deleted so it looks as if I, with my 0.4%, am not the only editor who isn't perfect.

I'll check the rest of the Nepal stub → start transfers, however, in case Gurung wasn't an isolated case. Batagur baska (talk) 12:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

That's done. I've redirected Mamta Chaudhary‎ and Aarati Bidari‎ which were previously noted as borderline, but I may have been too generous. Also borderline was Durga Subedi, but I think he should stay because he is a current (2024) international umpire and there is scope for expansion. Gurung, another umpire, was also noted as borderline but it seems he is no longer international, so a redirect is okay there. Batagur baska (talk) 12:45, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you tell me more about this "forthcoming cricket stub cull" that you speak of? I am not aware of any mechanism on Wikipedia that would mass delete articles just because they are stubs. I don't know how there would be a consensus for it. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, User:BilledMammal raised an RFC some time ago which resulted in a complete rewrite of WP:NSPORTS and all the individual sports' notability guidelines. Cricket, football and the Olympics were heavily criticised for holding excessive stubs which failed the GNG. As a result, countless stubs have been taken to AFD and, although efforts were made to try and invoke WP:ATD-R, many were deleted. BilledMammal has a number of hit lists such as User:BilledMammal/LUGSTUBS by sport (A to G), naming articles that will be draftified or removed (I'm not au fait with the details). "LUGSTUBS" refers to User:Lugnuts, who was banned a couple of years ago for, among other things, mass-creating short stubs which reference only a database and have little hope of expansion. I gather the number of these "micro-stubs" is in six figures!

Anyway, the position with cricket stubs is that they must comply with WP:GNG. Any which are sourced only to databases, or match reports, for example, can be bundled up and taken to AFD. Redirecting is fine per ATD and has the benefits of saving article histories and saving time at AFD. If you need details of what the RFC was about, you could ask BilledMammal personally, or see the VP proposal which leads to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability. I can't really tell you much more than that.

I found out about the RFC after I started trying to co-ordinate the contents of Category:Cricket stubs and its subcats. At first, I thought I was just tidying a mess, but then I realised I also need to preserve the stubs (or, at least, their histories) and presently I'm working my way through Category:Asian cricket biography stubs, which includes the Nepal ones.

Hope some of this helps. Thanks. Batagur baska (talk) 16:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

It appears you are coming from a few misconceptions. It would have been best had you asked somewhere first about what you were trying to achieve and whether it was a good idea, especially since you were embarking upon an editing spree using automated tools.

It's not proper to remove stub tags or to redirect articles just to hide them from deletion. And it is your responsibility to fix mistakes you make when carrying out high volume, high speed edits, without consensus, in areas you don't have sufficient grasp of. So, you'll have to go back and self-revert. You should only remove stub tags if the articles have already been expanded to provide brief overviews of their subjects. You can't determine stubbiness based on byte size; you have to evaluate prose size. I would suggest the WP:DYK criteria of 1500 characters of prose, if you need specific guidance.

You should seek alternative methods for what you are trying to achieve. Off the top of my head, you could tag articles on notable topics with {{sources exist}}, for example. But again, don't do that haphazardly just to keep an article off the radar of people who might nominate it for deletion. It is your responsibility to actually search for sources and verify that a sufficient number of them exist.

In the same vein, it is your responsibility to verify that the topic is not notable enough for a standalone article before you carry out an ATD. It is not someone else's responsibility to check them to make sure they are indeed non-notable. So, don't redirect articles just to save the history from deletion; redirect them only if you have personally verified that the topic does not meet GNG from not only the sources in the article but those that may be out there in the world, in various media, online or offline.

Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Taking each of your paragraphs in turn. In the first one, WP:BOLD applies and I do not need to ask somewhere at all. Your opinion is wrong.

Second. Someone who has an edit deletion percentage like your own is in no position to say what is "proper". I have complete grasp of cricket as a subject and so I can determine any cricket article's status and potential. While I do not claim to be 100% correct, I am satisfied that byte size is a reliable guideline for the typical cricket biography. That would not necessarily be the case for other subjects, of course, not even for another sport.

Third. Your comments here show you clearly don't understand what I am doing, and you are wasting my time.

Final. Who else is being asked to check GNG? I have already told you about the new NSPORTS criteria. Any article that lacks significant non-database referencing fails GNG and must be deleted unless someone applies an ATD. The old "other stuff exists" argument no longer applies.

That is the end of this discussion. Do not waste any more of my time. Batagur baska (talk) 22:16, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Batagur baska: AWB edits to hide articles from deletion "hit lists". Thank you. Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

List of Jersey cricketers moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to List of Jersey cricketers. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Significant amount of unsourced material related to BLPs. Material should be removed or sourced before being restored to mainspace. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.  // Timothy :: talk  17:32, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

List of Guernsey cricketers moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to List of Guernsey cricketers. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because Significant amount of unsourced material related to BLPs. Information needs to be sourced or removed. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.  // Timothy :: talk  17:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)