You did a review of Draft:99designs in AfC. I've made a number of substantial changes in response to the review and I wonder, could you take a look to tell me what you think? There is a Comment atop the article that outlines the changes. Many thanks. BC1278 (talk) 20:13, 30 October 2018 (UTC)BC1278
Hello there, I am still not convinced with the changes. I will leave it for another reviewer. Thanks. Hitro talk 08:35, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't clear. My point is that this sounds like a nationwide organisation for town planners: yes, it's not part of the federal government, but it's still (apparently) the Nigerian analogue to professional associations for planners in other countries, e.g. Royal Town Planning Institute or American Planning Association. Since many other large countries' nationwide professional planning organisations are notable, I'd say that merely being a large country's nationwide professional planning organisation is an assertion of importance, and therefore this one ought not be deleted without discussion at AFD. Nyttend (talk) 14:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello HitroMilanese. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tender (band), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being signed to a notable label indicates importance/significance (WP:CCSI#SINGER, WP:CCSI#BAND). Thank you. SoWhy 15:12, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
I just read that the page i created was deleted because of copyright issues.
the website that i copied the text from is the website of the same project- "Maktoob" book series- so i don't understand how can this be a violation?
Hello, Please see Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Please know, anything that you copy from internet is against copyright guidelines unless it is mentioned explicitly on the source's website that the content is available for reuse. Regards. Hitro talk 09:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
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 HitroMilanese,
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.
@Domdeparis:, Hello there, You should nominate articles for deletion when you think it is failing on a profession specific guidelines. Draftification is not a solution when it is obvious that the move is not uncontroversial as it has been reviewed already. Take it to AfD or Speedy it. See WP:DRAFTIFY, You can not use draftification as a backdoor route to deletion. Thanks Hitro talk 07:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Apart from that, the subject is meeting WP:GNG. I guess you have not checked the sources that are not presented in the article and hastily unreviewed it. Hitro talk 07:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Thé article IMHO clearly meets the criteria for draftification as per the new pages review section
The community has also allowed for new articles to be moved to draft space as an alternative to deletion. Below are a set of best practices to follow when draftifying an article in these circumstances. As part of the review of new pages, an unreviewed page may be moved to draft if:
the topic has some potential merit, and
the article does not meet the required standard, and
there is no evidence of active improvement.
or when the author clearly has a conflict of interest (per WP:COIEDIT).
I unreviewed it because it clearly didn't meet notability criteria when I came across it. If as you say there are sources not present in the article that show it passes GNG then as new pages reviewers we should add them ourselves or tag it It should not have been reviewed as is. So maybe you didn't check out the sources present before hastily reviewing it...who knows. There is a backlog of maybe 5000 articles and we are not very many doing the job of reviewing so I don't about you but if we do a search for sources for all articles that don't meet the standards it will get worse and worse. Do you honestly think that you did not make a mistake not tagging this article? Dom from Paris (talk) 13:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
@Domdeparis:, First of all, I want to confirm that I know your edits are in good faith and I have been seeing your contribution to Wikipedia for last two years and I really appreciate your contributions. Sometime conflict of thoughts develops between two good faith users and this is one of them.
Lets get back to the topic. So out of those 4 reasons what was your reason for draftification? You said it's a non-notable topic, that is a reason for deletion not draftification. See WP:DEL-REASON. I hope you know that criteria no.2 is for quality standard not notability standard. See WP:ATD-I. You are contradicting yourself if you draftified it for no.1 criteria. Criteria no.3 and 4 do not apply here.
Now regarding mistake, I don't think it's a mistake, every user at Wikipedia has their own way of thinking and I am still against the notability tag that you are persisting on to add. To say that your way is the only right way while reviewing any article is totally wrong, nothing like that is suggested at the policy pages of NPR or anywhere. I don't think any tag was required as stub articles with few reliable sources that verify the claims are accepted. Its good that the article is at Afd, the sources will be analysed there. Unreviewing and draftifying was not at all wise in my opinion.
Regarding backlogs. Heavy backlogs do not mean that we don't do research on the topic. I don't understand where you are getting this idea, we have to respect edits made by every new user regardless of backlogs. Wikipedia is collaborative project and 60% of the articles are created by new users. Hitro talk 15:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
@Domdeparis:, Now if this is not an error then this is done maliciously in a bad faith because I have not reviewed the article after you unreviewed it. You marked your reviewed article unreviewed and sent me a message instead, I don't understand why?. It is seriously like creating a fuss over nothing just to prove your point. This is bad, you should take back this message and check the review and patrol log here. Hitro talk 15:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
I presume that as an autopatrolled user when you move a page from draftspace to mainspace it gets automatically reviewed by you and this shows up on the curation toolbar so you did not realise that you had marked it as reviewed again. Please take the time to read the page WP:NPP and the excellent flow chart which should help you avoid these kind of messages and the waste of everyone's time. Here is an extract:
Does the article have 2 or more references to independent reliable sources that discuss the topic with significant coverage? (GNG)
(the reply is clearly No)
Does the article contain a credible claim of importance or significance?
(the reply is yes)
Is the article a biography of a living person?
(the answer is yes)
Does the article have any refs or external links at all?
(the answer is yes)
Tag the page with Wikiproject Biography living=yes
(this you did)
Does a google search news/books/scholar as appropriate for the topic turn up any reliable sources?
(you say that you found the sources so the answer is yes)
Tag with unreferenced or more references
(this you neglected to do twice once when you reviewed it the first time and also when you moved it back to mainspace)
This is what I have an issue with. new pages review is the last bastion against paid editors, COI editors and poorly sourced articles. if you do not have the time to add the sources yourself either do not mark it as reviewed or tag it for improvement. If you had done this in the first instance or the second time and not simply moved it with a "take it to afd" edit summary we could have all avoided this monumental waste of everyone's time. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, HitroMilanese. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Look I just saw you earlier message and I too have often come across your good work so I think this boils down to a couple of misunderstandings.
I really do believe that as per the above flow chart the article should have been tagged and there is not too much latitude there. I hear what you are saying about the backdoor to deletion and this is not my aim. I already prodded this article as being poorly sourced and it was deleted. The article was recreated with as you suggested above less than perfect sourcing and would not have survived an afd as it was. i don't know if you have followed the recent discussion about draftification on the NPP talk page but have a look at Kudpung's opinion, he says "I would draftify any page that IMO would probably pass AfD with a little work, but which would be a disgrace to leave in mainspace in its submitted condition." he also says that NPP is not a field hospital, I fully endorse this. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:48, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
It is a fact that I have difficulties in English. For this reason, I also have reservations to edit articles on en.wiki. However, I believe that the article Lelia Constantza Băjenescu does not have such problems. Can you report some speech errors in English? Thank's. PheonixRo (talk) 16:19, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello there, the article is one of the well translated articles on Wikipedia, I agree on that. However, I found some issues such as the lead sentence Lelia Constantza Băjenescu was the first radio amateur woman in Romania. "Radio Amateur Woman" does sound translated with proficiency. Apart from that, the article is a word by word translation of Romanian that may be written in better form in English sentences. Thanks. Hitro talk 06:57, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello HitroMilanese. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dussur, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: being a state-owned company, significance is indicated, especially if all owners are notable. Thank you. SoWhy 13:00, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi HitroMilanese. Thanks for your concern about my article Minaret Kabir
I don’t think this article should go into draft when it is about a historical relic in Iran and is directly translated from Wikipedia Persian language here
I hope you can consider this.Alex-h (talk) 23:45, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello Alex-h, the article was draftified due to lack of references not due to notability. You can always add references and submit it for review or move it back to mainspace. Regarding similar page on Persian Wiki, the guidelines at each language Wiki are different. At Persian Wiki, they may accept undersourced article on main space but at English Wikipedia, the subject must meet WP:GNG and should be well sourced. Regards. Hitro talk 08:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
I am a beginner and it was my first time to create a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdysturdy (talk • contribs) 14:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.
Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001reviews), Semmendinger (8,440reviews), PRehse (8,092reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016reviews), and Elmidae (3,615reviews). Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only sevenmonths, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.
The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.
Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019
At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.
Training video
Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minutevideo was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irish backstop until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SITH(talk) 13:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@StraussInTheHouse:, Hey there, I think you messed up this nomination a little, you are dropping messages at wrong inbox. I moved the original article to draftspace and nominated the redirection for deletion. Please, inform the original article creator too. Apart from that, it is not an AfD material, you could have redirected it to draft and CSD R2ed it or you could have redirected it to Irish_border_question#Backstop_proposal. Regards. Hitro talk 15:52, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Curse you Twinkle! Thanks for the heads up, I'll do that. Regards, SITH(talk) 15:56, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
let's remove the project as it does not meet the requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by R-sellimor (talk • contribs) 18:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Sanjay Awasthi is a noted person in Indian Sugar Industryedit
Sanjay Awasthi is a noted person in Indian Sugar Industry. He has contributed a lot for growth of Indian Sugar Industry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vikramashish (talk • contribs) 08:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Hitro just a quick question : How can I access the draftspace. I believe you transferred one of my articles at draftspace. Archaeologist02 (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
@Archaeologist02: Hello there, your draft has been improved and moved back to mainspace by an admin. See Siege of Perisabor. Regards. Hitro talk 19:56, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
@Sharafuhere:, please read the message on the speedy deletion template carefully. The article is being deleted because it is written in promotional tone, not because of the notability of the subject. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:YFA before recreating. Regards Hitro talk 19:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Zivame Speedy Page Deletion - Thanks for taggingedit
Dear HitroMilanese,
Thanks for addressing about the promotional type of content. Actually I am inspired with their 2 theories like Women running business & Online-offline concept.
Let me start from scratch for the wizards for creating page with neutral point of view.
Also will be looking for help from you & several other members to make it happen.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broken Hearts (Chevel Shepherd song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —teb728tc 23:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
@Teb728:, Hello there, I didn't create this page but I moved this page from mainspace to draft space and tagged the redirect for Speedy. I understand, this message is sent automatically by Twinkle. If you want to inform the original creator then please check the history of Draft:Broken Hearts (Chevel Shepherd song). Regards.Hitro talk 07:44, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Please help with the missing link
the sources are from prominent news papers and has not been much in news
Malshej (talk) 08:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
@Malshej:, Hello there, I noticed that you have added some references to the article. You should add few internal links too to the draft so that this article can be integrated into Wikipedia. I have moved the draft to correct title, Draft:Rajiv Rattan. Soon a reviewer will review it. Regards. Hitro talk 06:38, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Arthistorian1977}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Sahoo is from Telugu film industry. How can u place the original version name at down the list? Edit it at first place.. Or I will complain ur names to Wikipedia for vandalising the page. Pavankumaram (talk) 11:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
@Pavankumaram:, You were warned for removing content without giving proper reasons. Instead of writing message here, use edit summary to explain your edits so that other users may understand your motive. Regards. Hitro talk 11:28, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, the page Subodh Kerkar was blanked for possible copyvios. I have since created a fresh version of the article at this temp page. This version is free of copyvios. Also this particular revision is a clean revision of the page, free of copyvios. Could you please look into what action is to be taken for the same? Thanks. SerTanmay (talk) 07:33, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello there, I will look into this when I get time. Most probably this weekend. Regards. Hitro talk 15:46, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
.gif){kind=small}
