Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotedit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello, Diptanshu Das. You have new messages at Randykitty's talk page. Message added 20:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Cure Award
Thank you for all the great work you are doing promoting Wikipedia and medicine. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Diptanshu.D. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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.
Train-the-Trainer 2017: Invitation to participateedit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Diptanshu.D,
It gives us great pleasure to inform that the Train-the-Trainer (TTT) 2017 programme organised by CIS-A2K is going to be held from 20-22 February 2017.
What is TTT?
Train the Trainer or TTT is a residential training program. The program attempts to groom leadership skills among the Indian Wikimedia community members. Earlier TTT have been conducted in 2013, 2015 and 2016.
Who should join?
Any active Wikimedian contributing to any Indic language Wikimedia project is eligible to apply.
An editor must have 500+ edits.
Anyone who have already participated in an earlier iteration of TTT, can not apply.
The last date of filling the form is 26 January. If you have any question, please leave your message here.
Regards. GSS (talk|c|em) 09:26, 24 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I invite you to comment on my idea of article incubator. The idea is not new and details of the previous version can be found at WP:INCUBATOR. I would be glad if you enhance it with your experience. Feel free to improve upon the proposal that I have placed. Anasuya.D (talk) 09:33, 8 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago19 comments4 people in discussion
Hi! Please note Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#Rules of use rule number 4. You shouldn't make automated edits that have little or no effect on the page like [1] and [2]. Both <references/> and {{reflist}} are valid syntaxes that people use. -- intgr[talk] 19:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I thought that <references/> was less preferrable and was that {{reflist}} was more preferrable. Moreover, my actual objective has two stages. The first stage was to bring uniformity to the code. Although <references/> works, it is in html rather than wikicode and I thought that the latter was preferred. The second stage was to assign columns of 30em for medical articles that have more than 10 references. With {{reflist}} in place, this could be done seamlessly. This can be done easily using AWB. However, I would take care to ensure that I go through the user manual once again.DiptanshuTalk 22:59, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I checked Template:Reflist. <references /> is certainly not an equivalent to {{reflist}} and the none of the functionalities are defined for the former. The former has only been retained as the Cite template makes use of it. So, I would beg to differ with you that the automated edits that have little or no effect on the page. DiptanshuTalk 00:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
If you don't use any of the features provided by {{reflist}} then they are equivalent. Regardless of which form is preferred, "bringing uniformity to code" is exactly what you shouldn't use AWB for. Every change to a page has a cost -- in the amount of time it takes for others to review your change in their watchlist, making browsing article history more complicated, possibly hiding vandalism edits due to Mediawiki watchlist limitations, the slim chance of unintentionally breaking something, etc. For this reason, AWB has its rules and Wikipedia has a policy (WP:COSMETICBOT). -- intgr[talk] 07:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your inputs. I actually intended to split the references into two columns in case of articles having a relatively long list of references. For that I felt that unifying the code is important and therefore formed the list of articles that I have been processing (work almost done). The general fixes are being made alongside. In the next stage I planned to remove the depricated {{reflist|2}} as well as to run form a list of articles wherein the long single column of references needs to be split into multiple columns of 30em. I understand that your suspicion on me has increased your work load but A few board members of WikiProject Medicine know about the work I do. I am a long term Wikipedian and you should have already found out that I have not vandalized anything ever till now. So, possibly you could relax a bit. DiptanshuTalk 07:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Access of Wikipedia on mobile has increased and so, I think that it matters how a page renders on various resolutions. In such a case I do not consider the work as insignificant. This is certainly different from removing double spaces and stuff like that. DiptanshuTalk 07:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I never said that you vandalised anything. I meant that performing trivial edits can hide vandalism edits made by other people. If you want to use AWB for making significant edits (that actually change articles visually) that there's consensus for, go ahead. All I'm saying is, please follow AWB rules and Wikipedia bot policy -- don't make edits merely to "bring uniformity". WikiProject Medicine cannot grant you exemptions from following Wikipedia policies. -- intgr[talk] 08:07, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I have got what you have said and would be keeping it in account in case of my future actions. As of now, the list of pages processed in that fashion is almost at completion and so I would request you to bear with it. I will surely put AWB to better use in the future. DiptanshuTalk 08:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Any edit can "hide" previous edits (good or bad) for people who haven't configured their watchlists to see them. They're never hidden from Special:RecentChanges or WP:Huggle or similar tools, though, and many experienced editors have changed their watchlist settings, so this isn't usually a fatal problem.
On the actual question, <references /> is slightly faster than the template, so if you're not using columns or other features, then it would probably be better to leave it alone. This is perhaps especially true if the page is mostly being edited by someone who prefers the visual editor, because the list of references will auto-update while editors are inserting new references if the native wikitext code is on the page, but the template can't show the changes until the page is saved. Plain, native <references /> is also preferable for articles that will be translated, because many Wikipedias don't have a reflist template (the German Wikipedia even seems to have banned its use). On the other hand, if you want to use columns, that's currently the only way to do it. Dynamic columns are on the way, though: see the top section of Template talk:Reflist for an update. {{reflist|2}} will soon behave the same as {{reflist|30em}} (or whatever minimum size has been chosen). This should solve the fixed-column problem that template creates for people using smartphones. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
WhatamIdoing, thanks for your inputs. In fact, my main objective was to replace the fixed column references with 30em columns wherever applicable. After running the initial round my next step would have been to generate the list of medicine related articles that have {{reflist}} and to replace it with {{reflist|30em}}. Furthermore, I also plan to replace {{reflist|2}} with {{reflist|30em}}. This had been the purpose of my edits. DiptanshuTalk 05:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
It sounds like I am able to save you the trouble of making all those edits, then, given the events that are happening elsewhere. At minimum, I recommend postponing this project for a while. Also, I recommend talking it over with the other CHECKWIKI folks before doing it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
WhatamIdoing: That sounds good. As of now there are only 250 pages left to be processed in the first round from among about 25,000 medicine related pages. I will stop it outright. I was planning to begin replacing {{reflist|2}} with {{reflist|30em}} immediately after. Should I halt that too? Thereafter, I was planning to take up [[Category:All WikiProject Medicine articles]] and define a logic to form the list from pages having 11 or more instances of </ref> (to indicate the number of references) and then run a find and replace of {{reflist}} with {{reflist|30em}}. Should I halt that too? Please suggest.
Could you please suggest any CHECKWIKI user whom I could consult in this regard? DiptanshuTalk 08:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
{{reflist|2}} behaving the same as {{reflist|30em}} is in the test code, but hasn't gone live. It hasn't been announced yet either, so there's no way you would have known except if you follow the {{reflist}} talk page. Hold off on replacing/adding any reflist template for now.
There's an ARB case going on about cosmetic edits with AWB. It's dangerous right now to even think about making a cosmetic edit with AWB. Dang, I thought it. WMF's Thought Police are going to haul me off now.
Something that could be done with AWB... The magiclink that does PMID 1234567 --> PMID 1234567 is going away. It is being replaced with [[pmid:1234567]] --> pmid:1234567. One can also use a pipe (|), like a regular wikilink... [[pmid:1234567|Rogers (2012)]] --> Rogers (2012). You can use a regex in AWB to change this over. If you don't know how to code regex's I can do one for you. A listing of pages using the magiclink is at Category:Pages using PMID magic links. I've noticed that some of the cases are when a novice editor adds a ref without using cite templates, but the rest of the article does use templates. In this case, it would be best to convert the bare ref to use a cite template. Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/WPC 102 dump (CheckWiki error #102) contains other PMID problems. Bgwhite (talk) 08:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Bgwhite for your inputs. I will discuss with you separately about regex and other uses of AWB. WhatamIdoing: I will hold off the project completely.
Earlier, I had discussed about colwidth here. Thereafter I have been adhering to 30em. I had not otherwise following the discussions on Reflist talk page. DiptanshuTalk 09:13, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I just got encouraged by Magioladitis and need to ask Bgwhite and WhatamIdoing if I should get going once again. I would (also) be taking up the PMID stuff soon. DiptanshuTalk 18:44, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Your discussion about colwidth was in 2013. If it was still 2013-2016, then changing to {{reflist|30em}} would be appropriate. I was also changing it to {{reflist|30em}}. I no longer do this.
Changing {{reflist}} and <references /> --> {{reflist|2}} when there are more than 10 refs is still a good idea. As medical articles tend to have shorter refs, sometimes changing to {{reflist|3}} might be a better option than {{reflist|2}}.
In addition to PMIDs, adding {{DOI}} and {{PMC}} templates to bare refs is another thing that could be done with AWB. Bgwhite (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I recommend leaving the {{reflist}} changes alone for a while (maybe a month?). I figure that by that point, we'll have more information.
But I would strongly encourage you to make the PMID changes, as that's a source of annoyance for WPMED editors. I think that the PMID changes are much more urgent than the reflist columns. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I will stop with the {{reflist}} changes as of now. I will take up the PMID edits. I will have a look at it tomorrow and would then take it up. In the meantime WhatamIdoing would you please provide me inputs about my proposal meta:Grants:IdeaLab/Wiki Loves Social. DiptanshuTalk 02:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I think you should be able to find some people who are interested in this. However, you may have to look past the English Wikipedia to find them. Do you have friends at the Bengali or Hindi Wikipedias? Some of the mid-size and small Wikipedias use social media heavily for discussions and collaboration. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
The Original Barnstar
For your work with AWB. Please keep up the good work! Magioladitis (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Wow! Magioladitis I am flattered. I was getting the impression that my endeavour was discouraged and that I should not continue with it. I am new to use of AWB and would seek guidance from you. DiptanshuTalk 18:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
You are doing perfect. We need more wikignomes around! -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Boleyn for reviewing the page. I have added references. The Medical Council of India recognises the college and I have added the details of the listing. DiptanshuTalk 18:44, 5 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Here are the guidelines to determine what should and should not be part of WPMED[3] Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:25, 27 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Facto Post – Issue 1 – 14 June 2017
Editorial
This newsletter starts with the motto "common endeavour for 21st century content". To unpack that slogan somewhat, we are particularly interested in the new, post-Wikidata collection of techniques that are flourishing under the Wikimedia collaborative umbrella. To linked data, SPARQL queries and WikiCite, add gamified participation, text mining and new holding areas, with bots, tech and humans working harmoniously.
Scientists, librarians and Wikimedians are coming together and providing a more unified view of an emerging area. Further integration of both its community and its technical aspects can be anticipated.
While Wikipedia will remain the discursive heart of Wikimedia, data-rich and semantic content will support it. We'll aim to be both broad and selective in our coverage. This publication Facto Post (the very opposite of retroactive) and call to action are brought to you monthly by ContentMine.
Wikimedians interest themselves in everything under the sun — and then some. Discussion on "core topics" may, oddly, be a fringe activity, and was popular here a decade ago.
The situation on Wikidata today does resemble the halcyon days of 2006 of the English Wikipedia. The growth is there, and the reliability and stylistic issues are not yet pressing in on the project. Its Berlin conference at the end of October will have five years of achievement to celebrate. Think Wikimania Frankfurt 2005.
Progress must be made, however, on referencing "core facts". This has two parts: replacing "imported from Wikipedia" in referencing by external authorities; and picking out statements, such as dates and family relationships, that must not only be reliable but be seen to be reliable.
In addition, there are many properties on Wikidata lacking a clear data model. An emerging consensus may push to the front key sourcing and biomedical properties as requiring urgent attention. Wikidata's "manual of style" is currently distributed over thousands of discussions. To make it coalesce, work on such a core is needed.
WikiFactMine project pages on Wikidata, including a SPARQL library (in development).
Fatameh tool for adding items on scientific papers to Wikidata, by User: T Arrow. It has made a big recent impact. Offline for maintenance as we go to press, it is expected back soon.
Interviewed by Facto Post at the hackathon, Lydia Pintscher of Wikidata said that the most significant recent development is that Wikidata now accounts for one third of Wikimedia edits. And the essential growth of human editing.
Internet-In-A-Box
Impressive development work on Internet-in-a-Box featured in the WikiMedFoundation annual conference on Thursday. Hardware is Raspberry Pi, running Linux and the Kiwix browser. It can operate as a wifi hotspot and support a local intranet in parts of the world lacking phone signal. The medical use case is for those delivering care, who have smartphones but have to function in clinics in just such areas with few reference resources. Wikipedia medical content can be served to their phones, and power supplied by standard lithium battery packages.
Yesterday Katherine Maher unveiled the draft Wikimedia 2030 strategy, featuring a picturesque metaphor, "roads, bridges and villages". Here "bridges" could do with illustration. Perhaps it stands for engineering round or over the obstacles to progress down the obvious highways. Internet-in-a-Box would then do fine as an example.
"Bridging the gap" explains a take on that same metaphor, with its human component. If you are at Wikimania, come talk to WikiFactMine at its stall in the Community Village, just by the 3D-printed display for Bassel Khartabil; come hear T Arrow talk at 3 pm today in Drummond West, Level 3.
Dorstenia elata, a critically endangered South American herb, contained in Moraceae, the family of figs and mulberries
Clearly, conservation work depends on decisions about what should be done, and where. While animals, particularly mammals, are photogenic, species numbers run into millions. Plant species lie at the base of typical land-based food chains, and vegetation is key to the habitats of most animals.
ContentMine dictionaries, for example as tabulated at d:Wikidata:WikiFactMine/Dictionary list, enable detailed control of queries about endangered species, in their taxonomic context. To target conservation measures properly, species listings running into the thousands are not what is needed: range maps showing current distribution are. Between the will to act, and effective steps taken, the services of data handling are required. There is now no reason at all why Wikidata should not take up the burden.
Annotation is nothing new. The glossators of medieval Europe annotated between the lines, or in the margins of legal manuscripts of texts going back to Roman times, and created a new discipline. In the form of web annotation, the idea is back, with texts being marked up inline, or with a stand-off system. Where could it lead?
1495 print version of the Digesta of Justinian, with the annotations of the glossator Accursius from the 13th century
ContentMine operates in the field of text and data mining (TDM), where annotation, simply put, can add value to mined text. It now sees annotation as a possible advance in semi-automation, the use of human judgement assisted by bot editing, which now plays a large part in Wikidata tools. While a human judgement call of yes/no, on the addition of a statement to Wikidata, is usually taken as decisive, it need not be. The human assent may be passed into an annotation system, and stored: this idea is standard on Wikisource, for example, where text is considered "validated" only when two different accounts have stated that the proof-reading is correct. A typical application would be to require more than one person to agree that what is said in the reference translates correctly into the formal Wikidata statement. Rejections are also potentially useful to record, for machine learning.
As a contribution to data integrity on Wikidata, annotation has much to offer. Some "hard cases" on importing data are much more difficult than average. There are for example biographical puzzles: whether person A in one context is really identical with person B, of the same name, in another context. In science, clinical medicine require special attention to sourcing (WP:MEDRS), and is challenging in terms of connecting findings with the methodology employed. Currently decisions in areas such as these, on Wikipedia and Wikidata, are often made ad hoc. In particular there may be no audit trail for those who want to check what is decided.
Annotations are subject to a World Wide Web Consortium standard, and behind the terminology constitute a simple JSON data structure. What WikiFactMine proposes to do with them is to implement the MEDRS guideline, as a formal algorithm, on bibliographical and methodological data. The structure will integrate with those inputs the human decisions on the interpretation of scientific papers that underlie claims on Wikidata. What is added to Wikidata will therefore be supported by a transparent and rigorous system that documents decisions.
An example of the possible future scope of annotation, for medical content, is in the first link below. That sort of detailed abstract of a publication can be a target for TDM, adds great value, and could be presented in machine-readable form. You are invited to discuss the detailed proposal on Wikidata, via its talk page.
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Jytdog (talk) 18:10, 29 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Under the heading rerum causas cognescere, the first ever Wikidata conference got under way in the Tagesspiegel building with two keynotes, One was on YAGO, about how a knowledge base conceived ten years ago if you assume automatic compilation from Wikipedia. The other was from manager Lydia Pintscher, on the "state of the data". Interesting rumours flourished: the mix'n'match tool and its 600+ datasets, mostly in digital humanities, to be taken off the hands of its author Magnus Manske by the WMF; a Wikibase incubator site is on its way. Announcements came in talks: structured data on Wikimedia Commons is scheduled to make substantive progress by 2019. The lexeme development on Wikidata is now not expected to make the Wiktionary sites redundant, but may facilitate automated compilation of dictionaries.
And so it went, with five strands of talks and workshops, through to 11 pm on Saturday. Wikidata applies to GLAM work via metadata. It may be used in education, raises issues such as author disambiguation, and lends itself to different types of graphical display and reuse. Many millions of SPARQL queries are run on the site every day. Over the summer a large open science bibliography has come into existence there.
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
Hello, Diptanshu Das.
I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere(or here) 10:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
I notice that you have the "administrator someday" userbox. Reviewing new pages is one of the best ways to develop experience needed to successfully wield the mop. — Insertcleverphrasehere(or here) 10:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Diptanshu Das. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.
URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Diptanshu Das. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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.
Latest comment: 6 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Hello Diptanshu Das. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alan Rero, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: playing in a national team indicates significance. Thank you. SoWhy 15:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
@SoWhy: It is good to be a player in the national team but that does not make published information about this automatically available and therefore does not mandate that the person needs a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia is not a primary source of information and I found a lack of reliable information about this person and therefore tagged the article for deletion. I am adding a deletion tag once again. Please do not remove it. If you wish, feel free to contest the deletion and add more reliable sources to the article. If that gets done, deletion would automatically get averted. Diptanshu💬 15:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
As an experienced editor, I assumed you knew the difference between speedy deletion and regular deletion. For an article to avert speedy deletion, any credible claim of significance is sufficient. What you are referring to is notability. That can be discussed at WP:AFD without me objecting. But do not re-request speedy deletion because it might be considered WP:ADMINSHOPing. Regards SoWhy 15:49, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
@SoWhy: I accept that instead of a speedy deletion, it should have been considered for a regular deletion on grounds of notability. Diptanshu💬 15:52, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
No worries then. I fixed your AFD btw, you forgot to transclude it in the log and forgot the usual templates and stuff. For the future, consider activating Twinkle, it allows you to automate such nominations. Regards SoWhy 15:56, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
@SoWhy: Although I have been editing Wikipedia for long and have been aware of the principles of Wikipedia editing, it is only recently that I have been invited to patrol new pages. I have just recently taken up the role and am yet to get at ease with the process. Thanks for understanding. Diptanshu💬 15:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
As I said, no worry and do check out Twinkle, it makes all those tags (tagging, reporting, warning etc.) so much easier. If you have any questions regarding new page patrolling, don't hesitate to ask me. Regards SoWhy 16:10, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
Surely I would. Diptanshu💬 22:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Diptanshu Das, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Backlog update:
The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!
Outreach and Invitations:
If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.
New Year New Page Review Drive
A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.
General project update:
ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC) Reply
At the beginning of December, Wikidata items on individual scientific articles passed the 10 million mark. This figure contrasts with the state of play in early summer, when there were around half a million. In the big picture, Wikidata is now documenting the scientific literature at a rate that is about eight times as fast as papers are published. As 2017 ends, progress is quite evident.
Behind this achievement are a technical advance (fatameh), and bots that do the lifting. Much more than dry migration of metadata is potentially involved, however. If paper A cites paper B, both papers having an item, a link can be created on Wikidata, and the information presented to both human readers, and machines. This cross-linking is one of the most significant aspects of the scientific literature, and now a long-sought open version is rapidly being built up.
The effort for the lifting of copyright restrictions on citation data of this kind has had real momentum behind it during 2017. WikiCite and the I4OC have been pushing hard, with the result that on CrossRef over 50% of the citation data is open. Now the holdout publishers are being lobbied to release rights on citations.
But all that is just the beginning. Topics of papers are identified, authors disambiguated, with significant progress on the use of the four million ORCID IDs for researchers, and proposals formulated to identify methodology in a machine-readable way. P4510 on Wikidata has been introduced so that methodology can sit comfortably on items about papers.
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Diptanshu Das, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!
We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!
The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.
Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:
The total number of reviews completed for the month.
The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.
NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC) Reply
From the days of hard-copy liner notes on music albums, metadata have stood outside a piece or file, while adding to understanding of where it comes from, and some of what needs to be appreciated about its content. In the GLAM sector, the accumulation of accurate metadata for objects is key to the mission of an institution, and its presentation in cataloguing.
Today Wikipedia turns 17, with worlds still to conquer. Zooming out from the individual GLAM object to the ontology in which it is set, one such world becomes apparent: GLAMs use custom ontologies, and those introduce massive incompatibilities. From a recent article by sadads, we quote the observation that "vocabularies needed for many collections, topics and intellectual spaces defy the expectations of the larger professional communities." A job for the encyclopedist, certainly. But the data-minded Wikimedian has the advantages of Wikidata, starting with its multilingual data, and facility with aliases. The controlled vocabulary — sometimes referred to as a "thesaurus" as term of art — simplifies search: if a "spade" must be called that, rather than "shovel", it is easier to find all spade references. That control comes at a cost.
Case studies in that article show what can lie ahead. The schema crosswalk, in jargon, is a potential answer to the GLAM Babel of proliferating and expanding vocabularies. Even if you have no interest in Wikidata as such, simply vocabularies V and W, if both V and W are matched to Wikidata, then a "crosswalk" arises from term v in V to w in W, whenever v and w both match to the same item d in Wikidata.
For metadata mobility, match to Wikidata. It's apparently that simple: infrastructure requirements have turned out, so far, to be challenges that can be met.
One way of looking at Wikidata relates it to the semantic web concept, around for about as long as Wikipedia, and realised in dozens of distributed Web institutions. It sees Wikidata as supplying central, encyclopedic coverage of linked structured data, and looks ahead to greater support for "federated queries" that draw together information from all parts of the emerging network of websites.
Another perspective might be likened to a photographic negative of that one: Wikidata as an already-functioning Web hub. Over half of its properties are identifiers on other websites. These are Wikidata's "external links", to use Wikipedia terminology: one type for the DOI of a publication, another for the VIAF page of an author, with thousands more such. Wikidata links out to sites that are not nominally part of the semantic web, effectively drawing them into a larger system. The crosswalk possibilities of the systematic construction of these links was covered in Issue 8.
Wikipedia:External links speaks of them as kept "minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article." Here Wikidata finds more of a function. On viaf.org one can type a VIAF author identifier into the search box, and find the author page. The Wikidata Resolver tool, these days including Open Street Map, Scholia etc., allows this kind of lookup. The hub tool by maxlath takes a major step further, allowing both lookup and crosswalk to be encoded in a single URL.
Hello Diptanshu Das, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.
Backlog update:
The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
New Year Backlog Drive results:
We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!
General project update:
ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Jin0y, I have removed the redirect Electrical engineer and reverted to the previous version wherein I had left the proposal for deletion. Please discuss about the deletion of the current article in the relevant section. I would prefer a discussion to ensue first. Let the decision be based on a consensus. You had tried to change the redirect from Electrical engineering back to the same page. It does not work that way. Diptanshu💬 10:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
Jin0y, Please refer to the page Software engineer. If you can upgrade the page Electrical engineer to a similar status, there would be no problem in retaining the page. The current page has little to no contents and does not cite references. In the current status, the page does not meet Wikipedia standards and is liable to get deleted. Diptanshu💬 10:56, 19 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
Jin0y, it is good to know that you are developing the page. However, take a note that the article Software Engineer too is not a quality one. You would therefore have to develop it following the Wikipedia norms. Also have a look at Chemical engineer and articles in Category:Engineering occupations. Diptanshu💬 14:21, 19 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Jinoytommanjaly: Also check Structural engineer. Meanwhile, be sure to ensure neutrality of the article that you are developing. Electrical engineers are not produced from a single institute. Diptanshu💬 02:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotedit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Around the time in February when Wikidata clicked past item Q50000000, another milestone was reached: the mix'n'match tool uploaded its 1000th dataset. Concisely defined by its author, Magnus Manske, it works "to match entries in external catalogs to Wikidata". The total number of entries is now well into eight figures, and more are constantly being added: a couple of new catalogs each day is normal.
Since the end of 2013, mix'n'match has gradually come to play a significant part in adding statements to Wikidata. Particularly in areas with the flavour of digital humanities, but datasets can of course be about practically anything. There is a catalog on skyscrapers, and two on spiders.
These days mix'n'match can be used in numerous modes, from the relaxed gamified click through a catalog looking for matches, with prompts, to the fantastically useful and often demanding search across all catalogs. I'll type that again: you can search 1000+ datasets from the simple box at the top right. The drop-down menu top left offers "creation candidates", Magnus's personal favourite. m:Mix'n'match/Manual for more.
For the Wikidatan, a key point is that these matches, however carried out, add statements to Wikidata if, and naturally only if, there is a Wikidata property associated with the catalog. For everyone, however, the hands-on experience of deciding of what is a good match is an education, in a scholarly area, biographical catalogs being particularly fraught. Underpinning recent rapid progress is an open infrastructure for scraping and uploading.
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi
Let me introduce myself. I am Felix and I’m a novice in Wikipedia ! I wrote an article recently, it’s a biography of a french-american journalist : Laura Haim. Now, I’m waiting for validation from wikipedian reviewer. Would you be able to help me? I have no idea how long it could take… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Laura_Haim
Many thanks for your help.
Best
@Billybon:: I would definitely try to help you out. As I can see, a couple of inputs are already in place and there is some more work that needs to go into the article.Diptanshu💬 04:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Billybon:: As I can see, portions of the article have been directly copied from certain sites. This cannot be done when you create an article on Wikipedia. You may source contents from somewhere but you need to rewrite it in your own words. The first step would be to use some online plagiarism checker to identify those lines and to rewrite those. I will try to help you in this regard. Diptanshu💬 04:14, 18 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Billybon:: I have rewritten certain portions to remove copyvio. I have reviewed the article and have moved it to mainspace. I have also added categories to the article. It is important to add relevant categories. I have also assigned the article to relevant WikiProjects (on the talk page). When you edit articles in the future, make sure to take these steps apart from writing original text. Diptanshu💬 05:03, 18 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.
Paid editing
Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.
Subject-specific notability guidelines
The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.
News
The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello,
You left a note on my page saying that you marked it for deletion. All of our sources are justified and the article does not infringe on copyright. I am unsure why our article was flagged for deletion.
May you please explain on what grounds you think that my article on Mary K. Okheena should be deleted as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasmineJazzChapman (talk • contribs) 14:53, 7 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
@JasmineJazzChapman:: Yes, indeed I had left a deletion note on the article Mary K. Okheena. Although I had overlooked the entry in the biographical dictionary, the fact remains that the information contained in the article should come from reliable sources. I found a paucity of reliable sources for the given personality. Diptanshu💬 17:19, 7 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Absolutely fine. Great work! Diptanshu💬 13:03, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Really appreciate your support, sir. And thanks a lot for your contribution on the article. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.161.123.78 (talk) 13:08, 8 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
@НАЛБ: As you perhaps have seen, I have already updated the article Marin Roussev Mehandjiev. However, here are the things you need to do:
It seems that you have a direct association with the person in question. On the article talk page please declare COI, if any, as per WP:COI.
The contents of the article need to be referenced. Please provide inline references mentioning the sources of the pieces of information contained in the article.
When you write on a talk page, make sure to sign by putting ~~~~ at the end.
Open Citations Month, with its eminently guessable hashtag, is upon us. We should be utterly grateful that in the past 12 months, so much data on which papers cite which other papers has been made open, and that Wikidata is playing its part in hosting it as "cites" statements. At the time of writing, there are 15.3M Wikidata items that can do that.
Pulling back to look at open access papers in the large, though, there is is less reason for celebration. Access in theory does not yet equate to practical access. A recent LSE IMPACT blogpost puts that issue down to "heterogeneity". A useful euphemism to save us from thinking that the whole concept doesn't fall into the realm of the oxymoron.
Some home truths: aggregation is not content management, if it falls short on reusability. The PDF file format is wedded to how humans read documents, not how machines ingest them. The salami-slicer is our friend in the current downloading of open access papers, but for a better metaphor, think about skinning an onion, laboriously, 100 times with diminishing returns. There are of the order of 100 major publisher sites hosting open access papers, and the predominant offer there is still a PDF.
Red onion cross section
From the discoverability angle, Wikidata's bibliographic resources combined with the SPARQL query are superior in principle, by far, to existing keyword searches run over papers. Open access content should be managed into consistent HTML, something that is currently strenuous. The good news, such as it is, would be that much of it is already in XML. The organisational problem of removing further skins from the onion, with sensible prioritisation, is certainly not insuperable. The CORE group (the bloggers in the LSE posting) has some answers, but actually not all that is needed for the text and data mining purposes they highlight. The long tail, or in other words the onion heart when it has become fiddly beyond patience to skin, does call for a pis aller. But the real knack is to do more between the XML and the heart.
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Das, I've declined an article you tagged A7 because the subjects passes WP:NPROF criteria 6 as has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society.
He's a Vice chancellor of a State operated University established over 20 years ago.
Regards,
Mahveotm (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I wrote all that i have written from a neutral point of view and if u are not cleared with it check the source — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunboy005 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I just noticed the warning you left on my talk page. I find it improper that you are leaving a message like "Please keep these things in mind when you create subsequent articles on Wikipedia" on my talk page, without checking the page history (it was a redirect) and my contribution history. I was one of those people who helped form the new page curation system (which you used to review) and have been a very long time editor. It is not a good practice to give warnings to regulars, and it is a good habit to check the article's history when reviewing, as in this case, it was a redirect and not an article. Please have a read of our guideline to know the purpose of redirects. Best, JimCarter 13:30, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Jim Carter:, allow me to clarify. Firstly, we all try to help in our own capacities. Now, since I am a new page reviewer, I am given the options of reviewing an article and the options include sending a message to the creator with any suggestions that the reviewer (me in this case) may have. I had chosen to send the message especially because we have already interacted. The first line as well as the structure is an automated one and the message from the reviewer gets put within. So, what you inferred as a warning, is a feature of the tools provided. You can feel free to discuss it with the respective community. Regarding the looking up of history, I did it soon after the review and I left a second note immediately afterward. Diptanshu💬 15:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
I would suggest not to use the default feature of page curation (I have not used it since a long time) to send a message to the creator before thoroughly checking through the article history. The messages are particularly aimed at new editors. I guess you realized that you were sending the message to an autopatrolled user? Cheers! JimCarter 00:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your recommendations in my first article.
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I notice that there are a lot of specific Wikipedia technical ways to do it, that i still dont manage. Please feel welcome to modify my article or explain me specifically what to modify and how, it it is possible for you.
My best Regards, Aileen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asdankers (talk • contribs) 22:44, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Asdankers: I have left a message on your talk page. Please go through the provided links and it will help you to understand the specific ways of Wikipedia. Furthermore, when you write on some talk page, make sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Do not hesitate to contact me in case you have any doubts of queries ever in the future. Diptanshu💬 01:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Ok...Pls delete this page as I now understand some of the reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odx101 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Odx101:, I hope that you are talking about your article Sonni Gopal. I have left a welcome note on your talk page. Please go through the links. It will help you to understand what Wikipedia is all about, and will act as a guide for you to edit Wikipedia. Diptanshu💬 18:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2017 Cure Award
In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.
WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.
Deletion tags
Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.
Backlog drive:
A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.
Editathons
There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
Paid editing - new policy
Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.
Subject-specific notability guidelines
The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
Not English
A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.
News
Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.
The proposal includes downloading 30,000 open access papers, aiming (roughly speaking) to create a baseline for medical referencing on Wikipedia. It leaves open the question of how these are to be chosen.
The basic criteria of WP:MEDRS include a concentration on secondary literature. Attention has to be given to the long tail of diseases that receive less current research. The MEDRS guideline supposes that edge cases will have to be handled, and the premature exclusion of publications that would be in those marginal positions would reduce the value of the collection. Prophylaxis misses the point that gate-keeping will be done by an algorithm.
Two well-known but rather different areas where such considerations apply are tropical diseases and alternative medicine. There are also a number of potential downloading troubles, and these were mentioned in Issue 11. There is likely to be a gap, even with the guideline, between conditions taken to be necessary but not sufficient, and conditions sufficient but not necessary, for candidate papers to be included. With around 10,000 recognised medical conditions in standard lists, being comprehensive is demanding. With all of these aspects of the task, ScienceSource will seek community help.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Diptanshu Das, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.
Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!
As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.
Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I need time to add more exact details
Dont block me... What I pointed there is true — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jainjoo (talk • contribs) 08:49, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Jainjoo: I am not an admin and therefore cannot block or unblock you. But somebody else can. I felt that you are perhaps trying to add value. However, if you want to do so, you need to do so following the norms of Wikipedia. Please get familiarised first by going through the links I have provided in my message on your talk page. Also, when you reply on a talk page, sign by leaving ~~~~ at the end. Diptanshu💬 09:16, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello
Please don't delete article about Benjamin Bilski - in some hours or days I will finish it with prooflinks and proves of importance of this article GGFox (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
GGFox: I have removed the speedy deletion template and have moved it to draft space. You can request a review after you are done with the article. Diptanshu💬 10:10, 24 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Hello, Diptanshu Das. You have new messages at Ksyrie's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
The reason I wanted to do this is because in Ronald Yoder Sr. Entertainment videos, he features a photograph of actress Tilda Swinton and describes her as a child's psychologist named Shirley Beverly French. --Mozart834428196 (talk) 12:23, 25 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Mozart834428196, unfortunately the reason is not self-explanatory and therefore such a redirect can give rise to an unnecessary confusion. I hope you understand. Diptanshu💬 20:04, 25 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Facto Post enters its second year, with a Cambridge Blue (OK, Aquamarine) background, a new logo, but no Cambridge blues. On-topic for the ScienceSource project is a project page here. It contains some case studies on how the WP:MEDRS guideline, for the referencing of articles at all related to human health, is applied in typical discussions.
Close to home also, a template, called {{medrs}} for short, is used to express dissatisfaction with particular references. Technology can help with patrolling, and this Petscan query finds over 450 articles where there is at least one use of the template. Of course the template is merely suggesting there is a possible issue with the reliability of a reference. Deciding the truth of the allegation is another matter.
This maintenance issue is one example of where ScienceSource aims to help. Where the reference is to a scientific paper, its type of algorithm could give a pass/fail opinion on such references. It could assist patrollers of medical articles, therefore, with the templated references and more generally. There may be more to proper referencing than that, indeed: context, quite what the statement supported by the reference expresses, prominence and weight. For that kind of consideration, case studies can help. But an algorithm might help to clear the backlog.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
For completing over 100 reviews during the 2018 June Backlog Drive, please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping out at New Page Patrol and keep up the good work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere(or here) 01:59, 1 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi there! I noticed a recent draft you approved seemed under-sourced to meet the notability threshold for films, so I moved it back to draft space to incubate further. If you feel this in in error, leave me a message, and thanks! Drewmutt(^ᴥ^)talk 15:05, 17 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
Officially it is "bridging the gaps in knowledge", with Wikimania 2018 in Cape Town paying tribute to the southern African concept of ubuntu to implement it. Besides face-to-face interactions, Wikimedians do need their power sources.
Hackathon mentoring table wiring
Facto Post interviewed Jdforrester, who has attended every Wikimania, and now works as Senior Product Manager for the Wikimedia Foundation. His take on tackling the gaps in the Wikimedia movement is that "if we were an army, we could march in a column and close up all the gaps". In his view though, that is a faulty metaphor, and it leads to a completely false misunderstanding of the movement, its diversity and different aspirations, and the nature of the work as "fighting" to be done in the open sector. There are many fronts, and as an eventualist he feels the gaps experienced both by editors and by users of Wikimedia content are inevitable. He would like to see a greater emphasis on reuse of content, not simply its volume.
If that may not sound like radicalism, the Decolonizing the Internet conference here organized jointly with Whose Knowledge? can redress the picture. It comes with the claim to be "the first ever conference about centering marginalized knowledge online".
Plugbar buildup at the Hackathon
Links
ScienceSource focus list (shortcut WD:SSFL on Wikidata), project to tag a first-pass open access medical bibliography on Wikidata, and also overcome the systematic biases in the medical literature by curation.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)
Hello Diptanshu Das, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
June backlog drive
Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers. Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.
New technology, new rules
New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.
Editathons
Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
The Signpost
The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.
Anti-parasitic drugs being distributed in Côte d'Ivoire What's a Neglected Disease?, ScienceSource video
To grasp the nettle, there are rare diseases, there are tropical diseases and then there are "neglected diseases". Evidently a rare enough disease is likely to be neglected, but neglected disease these days means a disease not rare, but tropical, and most often infectious or parasitic. Rare diseases as a group are dominated, in contrast, by genetic diseases.
A major aspect of neglect is found in tracking drug discovery. Orphan drugs are those developed to treat rare diseases (rare enough not to have market-driven research), but there is some overlap in practice with the WHO's neglected diseases, where snakebite, a "neglected public health issue", is on the list.
From an encyclopedic point of view, lack of research also may mean lack of high-quality references: the core medical literature differs from primary research, since it operates by aggregating trials. This bibliographic deficit clearly hinders Wikipedia's mission. The ScienceSource project is currently addressing this issue, on Wikidata. Its Wikidata focus list at WD:SSFL is trying to ensure that neglect does not turn into bias in its selection of science papers.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello Diptanshu Das, 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
The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.
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.
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: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).
In an ideal world ... no, bear with your editor for just a minute ... there would be a format for scientific publishing online that was as much a standard as SI units are for the content. Likewise cataloguing publications would not be onerous, because part of the process would be to generate uniform metadata. Without claiming it could be the mythical free lunch, it might be reasonably be argued that sandwiches can be packaged much alike and have barcodes, whatever the fillings.
The best on offer, to stretch the metaphor, is the meal kit option, in the form of XML. Where scientific papers are delivered as XML downloads, you get all the ingredients ready to cook. But have to prepare the actual meal of slow food yourself. See Scholarly HTML for a recent pass at heading off XML with HTML, in other words in the native language of the Web.
The argument from real life is a traditional mixture of frictional forces, vested interests, and the classic irony of the principle of unripe time. On the other hand, discoverability actually diminishes with the prolific progress of science publishing. No, it really doesn't scale. Wikimedia as movement can do something in such cases. We know from open access, we grok the Web, we have our own horse in the HTML race, we have Wikidata and WikiJournal, and we have the chops to act.
Enslaved: People of the Historic Slave Trade, Michigan State University project for a linked open data platform. Quote: "Disambiguating and merging individuals across multiple datasets is nearly impossible given their current, siloed nature."
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.
Hello Diptanshu Das, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
Backlog
As of 21 October 2018[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.
Community Wishlist Proposal
There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this 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.
Around 2.7 million Wikidata items have an illustrative image. These files, you might say, are Wikimedia's stock images, and if the number is large, it is still only 5% or so of items that have one. All such images are taken from Wikimedia Commons, which has 50 million media files. One key issue is how to expand the stock.
Indeed, there is a tool. WD-FIST exploits the fact that each Wikipedia is differently illustrated, mostly with images from Commons but also with fair use images. An item that has sitelinks but no illustrative image can be tested to see if the linked wikis have a suitable one. This works well for a volunteer who wants to add images at a reasonable scale, and a small amount of SPARQL knowledge goes a long way in producing checklists.
Gran Teatro, Cáceres, Spain, at night
It should be noted, though, that there are currently 53 Wikidata properties that link to Commons, of which P18 for the basic image is just one. WD-FIST prompts the user to add signatures, plaques, pictures of graves and so on. There are a couple of hundred monograms, mostly of historical figures, and this query allows you to view all of them. commons:Category:Monograms and its subcategories provide rich scope for adding more.
And so it is generally. The list of properties linking to Commons does contain a few that concern video and audio files, and rather more for maps. But it contains gems such as P3451 for "nighttime view". Over 1000 of those on Wikidata, but as for so much else, there could be yet more.
Go on. Today is Wikidata's birthday. An illustrative image is always an acceptable gift, so why not add one? You can follow these easy steps: (i) log in at https://tools.wmflabs.org/widar/, (ii) paste the Petscan ID 6263583 into https://tools.wmflabs.org/fist/wdfist/ and click run, and (iii) just add cake.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.
Hello Diptanshu Das,
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.
.jpg)
. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: 
, 
, 
, 
.
.jpg)
