User talk:Famousdog/Archive 2

Outing

Hi Famousdog. In future, please follow the steps at WP:OUTING. Posting at WP:ANI, one of the highest traffic boards on wikipedia is not a good idea. Also, it's best not to confirm or deny any information, as it gives them feedback. Worm^TT(talk) 09:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Cheers for the advice. This has never happened to me in over 6 years on WP, so I wasn't sure how to respond. Famous_dog (c) 09:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem, thanks for bringing it to our attention. Worm^TT(talk) 09:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you.Ksirok (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Article vandalising

Famousdog, In future, please cite reasons aside from "peacockery" when making edits. You just deleted verifiable information from reliable sources off of the wiki page. Do not do this in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.220.108 (talk) 17:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Stop trolling

You're a troll, stop deleting NLP articles just because you don't agree with it. You're deleting some important information, and the moderators of wikipedia should ban you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.245.236.57 (talk) 05:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Famousdog, say hi to Brendan and Declan for me Peaceful07Peaceful07 (talk) 00:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Failure mode, effects and criticality analysis

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Failure mode, effects and criticality analysis, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://engineeringresearch.org/index.php/GJRE/article/view/815.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 07:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Move of Failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis to Failure mode, effects and criticality analysis

You gave the edit summary "...since that title was not grammatically correct". That's simply not true as you can read in Serial comma. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 08:41, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Jac16888 ^Talk 15:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Acupuncture

I undid your edit as I was replying to Middle 8, not to Moxy as your indentation implied. Please see WP:THREAD regarding indentation protocol. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:46, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Behavioral optometry

An article that you have been involved in editing, Behavioral optometry , has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Lou Sander (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Revert on Neurotheology

Hi, I admit the revert was an accident. I was aiming to revert the other users edits not yours. I'll fix it later, and maybe a full-scale revert isn't in order anyway. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 17:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Ha ha! Thanks for explaining. These things happen. Famous_dog (c) 17:50, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	It's truly a Dog's Life when you are just that diplomatic! (And in context) Famous is as famous does, and so therefore in-terms of being diplomatic. . .you get my strong favour of DutchBarn Diplomacy! Job well done Sir! The Apollo Seed (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 17 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the T. B. Joshua page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Famousdog. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Bart De Strooper

Greetings Fd. My background is maths/physics with very little biology but I recently meet Prof Bart De Strooper in London and, if and only if you have time, I wonder if you could add anything to his article. No problems if no. Regards JRPG (talk) 17:06, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I can't stop laughing

dif Jytdog (talk) 21:03, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Thank you. I'm here all week... Famous_dog (c) 13:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

rankings of academic publishers

dear all - ok i am a newcomer to wikipedia but as i was about to correct my work today i found that you - the editors march 27, 2017 - simply removed all traces of it to the dustbin, including my correct reference to the sense consortium under its standardized new wikipedia name.

i think - saying with without chagrin - that you treated my work simply unfairly, since the new hong kong ranking, published by one of china's important universities is just as a milestone in the ranking of publishers development as the shanghai ranking is for university ranking.

if you had taken the care to read their ranking analysis you would have discovered that it is based on that of the australian political science association and on similar other trustworthy previous work. simply to remove my references to the hong kong ranking is unjust. can you send me a copy at least to my talk page, so that i can start to work again on the article?

you inserted references like "self publication" etc. while in fact the hong-kong based university published it on their earlier website. it is simply important also to consider what universities actually do, and how they consider publishers. no ranking is perfect.

if you invest just a little of time you will also discover that my proposals find a reflection in the literature to be found in google scholar on ranking of academic publishers. but please accept my kind regardsBibliometer 1492 (talk) 19:16, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Comment and message from Bibliometer 1492

I hope that you now like my re-written version of the article. kind regards and please have wiki patience with me Bibliometer 1492 (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I looked at your edits and added some (hopefully educational) ones of my own. I haven't addressed the content of your edits yet, just the format. Famous_dog (c) 12:53, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

The Expanse (novel series)

You undid my revision of The Expanse (novel series), changing "hundreds" back to "thousands".

It seems to me that "thousands" has an uppermost limit of somewhere between 100,000 and 1,000,000. If we assume 2000 is the minimum for "thousands", half of the systems accessible by 1300 rings would have to have two planets. (Or 400 have three planets. Up to one system that has 700 planets.)

How about changing "humanity gains access to thousands of new worlds by use of the ring" to "humanity gains access to many new worlds by use of the ring"? The next sentence narrows it down to something like "thousands" by saying by saying there are more than 1300 rings.

It's obvious that you are the expert on the Expense. (And, just by me writing you this, we're getting too much into fictional-plot-as-a-substitute-for-the-real-world -- there are no "rings" beyond Uranus leading to other stars.) I leave it up to you whether you wish to change to article. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Roy. Thanks for crunching those numbers! Since you are a fan of the Expanse, you've probably heard about it already, but NASA has just discovered that the star TRAPPIST-1 has seven planets around it, three of which are potentially habitable. That's just one star, but we are finding exoplanets at such a huge rate these days that I would think that thousands rather than hundreds is a more likely number of planets to find around the 1300 new stars. Current estimates suggest that almost every star in the galaxy (and presumably all the other galaxies) has at least one planet. However, I am entirely in agreement that we could simply side-step the issue by saying "many"! Famous_dog (c) 10:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

talk:acupuncture

Sorry for deleting your reply to the troll. There really is a productive discussion related to article improvement on that page though. I don't disagree with what you are saying in any way but I'd rather you addressed the troll with either advice or a warning on its talk page, rather than using the article talk page. I'll move the discussion over to the associated talk page for safe keeping if you agree. Many thanks Edaham (talk) 15:06, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Edaham:: Despite being misguided and immature, Playalake is not a troll by my definition and I do not agree with your deleting his/her or my comments. All you have done is further annoyed Playalake and provided further ammunition to his/her claim that Wikipedia does censor things. Not the best move, in my opinion. Famous_dog (c) 06:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@Famousdog: Point taken, it's been restored. I'm sure you understand how frustrating it is when while wading through sources and comparing article content with other editors, associated talk page threads deteriorate into arguments about wp policy and conduct. Wikipedia does allow for the removal of unhelpful comments from talk pages, and I frequently remove them if they impede productive discussion. I admit that that comment was on a fine line as the editor was voicing opposition, but everything after the word "oppose" was just designed to slang the encyclopedia and made no attempt to further improvement. Replying to it with bullet points begins the cycle of steering the thread toward an argument about POV when for the best part the thread was dedicated to trawling sources and genuine suggestions for changes. Edaham (talk) 08:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Nassim Taleb Recent Edits

VergilDen (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Rfc notice

An Rfc is opened at Charles, Prince of Wales, concerning that article's lead. You may want to keep that article on your watchlist :) GoodDay (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Famousdog. 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) 08:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Famousdog. 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.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• 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. -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 10:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Message to famousdog Hi Famous Dog. This is a reply message regarding the article "Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition". My apologies, but I am afraid I do not know how to make a message (except with prize stars) so I am putting this prosaic message here. In your suggestions for improvements, you mention that the article above is not notable, so in the update to the article there is now a citation to a 2016 Scientific American article that specifically describes NIMI and its importance to technology. Please feel free to delete this message once read. Best, relleh22hctac Relleh22hctac (talk) 13:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

• Eduards Andersons, as the information shows, played at an Olympics competition so the "Notability" or "Refimprove" tags were Inapplicable; the amount of sourcing is usually all there is, especially for these pre-Internet subjects. SwisterTwister talk 17:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
• There's another example today but this one is on an academic subject; on Jude Cassidy, you added the template "Notability" and also commented to the author, Britney.cuevas, they needed to add independent sources. However, the relevant Notability, WP:PROF, actually has no mention of needing independent Notability. In terms of Notability, Notability has been established in that she's published several significant works (cited thousands of times, showing she's clearly an expert). If you have any questions, please feel welcome to ask. SwisterTwister talk 16:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Famousdog. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Famousdog, 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)

nova

Nova is a good journal reputed in the academic fields. Many universities give credits and loans to their professor for publishing here. I dot know why some editors in WIKI has a biased image of it. Nova is listed in Clarivate Masterfull book, which means that this includes a higher quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellscholar9 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Reviewing

Hello, Famousdog. AfC submissions Random submission 3+ months 2,604 pending submissions to update I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged. Would you please consider becoming an Articles for Creation reviewer? Articles for Creation reviewers help new users learn the ropes of creating their first articles, and identify whether topics are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Reviewing drafts doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia inclusion policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After requesting to be added to the project, reviewing is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the reviewing instructions before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 03:16, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Famousdog, 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 1^st and run until January 29^th. 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)

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

[[User:Famousdog|<font color="008000">Famous</font>]][[User_talk:Famousdog|<font color="00008B"><b><sub>dog</sub></b></font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Famousdog| (c)]] : Famous_dog (c)

to

[[User:Famousdog|<span style="color: #008000">Famous</span>]][[User_talk:Famousdog|<b style="color: #00008B"><sub>dog</sub></b>]] [[Special:Contributions/Famousdog| (c)]] : Famous_dog (c)

—Anomalocaris (talk) 10:00, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Changed. Famous_dog (c) 14:31, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 21:15, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stewart Levenson (2nd nomination)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stewart Levenson (2nd nomination). — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Thank You
		Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:18, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

iNews Wikimedia

iNews TV to iNews Wikipedia di Indonesia, Nasional en diseakrtauy iNews Wiki sene new --Televisi di Medan (talk) 09:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Wiki News iNews TV to iNews.id Vandal Forasional --Televisi di Medan (talk) 10:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Go here to discuss this. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 10:16, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Famousdog, 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)

Nomis

Hi Famousdog, I've recently updated a Nomis citation you added to City of Carlisle, with a new template I've been involved in that may be of interest. Template:NOMIS2011 hopefully makes it easier to create quality cites to Nomis Local Area Reports Search. I hope this is useful for you.TiB chat 20:09, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

The Moffatts

How could you possibly think that The Moffatts was not notable? The band has a very extensive discography with multiple charted hits, including a #1 single on the major Canadian charts. They clearly pass WP:BAND with flying colors. The article being in poor shape is not relevant to their asserted notability. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:11, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Fair point. I must have been having an off day. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 10:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

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

ACTRIAL:

• 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.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

• 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.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vienna University of Economics and Business, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Michael Lang and Michael Meyer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Your userpage

Hi, Famousdog, I saw you on the fringe theories noticeboard (I've replied there) and took a look at the article Michael Persinger and, since it was mentioned in the article history, also at your userpage. It's nice and informative, and I certainly don't have a problem with the content PyramidalCell was complaining about. But you really can't say the kind of thing you say there about Philip Davies. The policy concerning biographies of living people applies to all Wikipedia pages, including personal userpages. Please remove the bad bits about Davies — I'm sure you know which bits they are. P.S., I suppose you're not related to User:Roxy the dog? Also pretty famous,😀 also a resister of the POV-pushing of lunatic charlatans. Bishonen | talk 14:28, 3 May 2018 (UTC).

Famousdog is a southerner (Shipley???) when compared to myself. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 15:26, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, @Bishonen:. I will (reluctantly) moderate that material. No, I'm not a relation or off-wiki acquaintance of @Roxy the dog:. The geographical proximity, shared interests and similar usernames are all purely coincidental. If I remember correctly, we have been accused (possibly several times) of being sockpuppets of each other. A theory to which I'm sure the tin-foil hat brigade stick to this day. This conversation is simply adding more grist to that mill. Now I'll go and edit my userpage. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 09:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Suspected cracking attempt

I suspect that somebody has just tried to crack my account and I think I know who it was. What should I do? Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 12:59, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Why do you suspect it? Did you get an e-mail saying somebody has tried to log into your account? As long as you have a reasonably strong password, see WP:PASSWORD, you don't need to do a thing. These log-in attempts happen quite frequently and can be ignored. Or was it something else? Bishonen | talk 14:28, 3 May 2018 (UTC).

Adding: I see around the noticeboards that there have been many failed attempts to log into people's accounts yesterday and today. I've had a couple of them myself. That probably means it's something systematic, and the person you suspect is innocent. Bishonen | talk 19:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC).

I got an alert about a failed attempt to log on to my account from a new device as I was logged in and editing on my own computer. I had literally just had a particularly obnoxious interaction (see section below) with an individual who may think they know enough about me personally to guess my password and it made me very suspicious. I hope you are right, @Bishonen:, that yesterday was just a busy day in Crackerville. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 10:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I can't agree with @Andrew Davidson:'s assertion...

Re [1]. Posting this here since it's kinda off-topic for the AFD, but you'll notice when interacting with AD (or his former sock Colonel Warden) on AFDs, he has a very bad habit of pretending to be an expert on whatever topic is under discussion while saying things that actually demonstrate he doesn't understand the topic at all.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Invariably said pretensions are made with the intent of forcing the AFD to end in a "keep" or "no consensus" result, regardless of what editors actually familiar with the topics in question think. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 11:21, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Hmm. Okay. Thanks for the heads-up. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 11:37, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to add to a message to which you've already responded, but I rather stupidly left out a particularly glaring on. This supplemental message is just so you don't get a "You have new messages ping" and not actually have any new messages. I hate that, and tend to assume others do as well. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:13, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

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

ACTRIAL:

• 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.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Famousdog, 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.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

BLP=

Your edit may have been sourced but your edit summary wasn't. See BLP noticeboard. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 07:50, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

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

Hello Famousdog, 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.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

statement without a source

I saw you added this statement without a source unfortunately. Can you add a source please ?--Wuerzele (talk) 21:25, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Done. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 06:58, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello Famousdog, 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.

• There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

• A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

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

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

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

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

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

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

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

Backlog

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

Community Wishlist Proposal

• 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.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

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

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

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

Hello Famousdog,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

• Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

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