weather edit

The previous Masters pages included a weather section for each day of the tournament. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 13:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

That one did but most don't have it. Not sure why it can't be added to the daily summaries, if there's anything interesting to say Nigej (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Nomination for deletion of Template:Baltic Pipeline System-II full/doc edit

 Template:Baltic Pipeline System-II full/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:13, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

ITN recognition for Jack Newton edit

On 21 April 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jack Newton, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 03:38, 21 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Olympic database edit

Regarding this edit: did you mean to say "However it has not given me any confidence..."? isaacl (talk) 20:29, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

succession boxes edit

I was wondering your reason for removing the succession boxes from the 4 golf majors? Thank you Tomrtn (talk) 22:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

See WT:GOLF#Succession boxes in major championships. As noted there, the auto-expanded navbox seems to me a better way forward. Nigej (talk) 05:18, 14 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022 edit

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Nigej,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 814 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 859 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Cup events edit

As you've probably seen, I recently created a page for Vic Bennetts. He won a number of "cup" events during his amateur career. Some examples are here and here. I wasn't sure whether they are worthy of inclusion in the "Amateur Wins" section. I'll definitely keep them in the prose but I'm not sure if they meet our standards otherwise. They may be along the level of schoolboys championships. If you have the time, please briefly let me know your thoughts.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 07:39, 8 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

I don't know anything about these events, but my general view would be that 1 round event shouldn't be included. All pros won large numbers of amateur events in their early careers and our list of wins needs to concentrate on the most important. Nigej (talk) 05:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok thanks. I have deleted them from the Amateur wins sections.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 22:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Australian Men's Interstate Teams Matches edit

I am almost done harassing you about Vic Bennetts. On your Australian Men's Interstate Teams Matches page, under the Appearances section, I noticed that you only have Bennetts playing in the matches from 1963 to 1966. However, I have links stating he participated in the 1962 and 1967 events. In 1962 article, it says he was selected for the "junior" team. Perhaps that is a different category? For the 1967 article, however, it says he was selected for the "senior" team - not sure what was going on with that but maybe he just selected to drop out later on? Any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks, Oogglywoogly (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

I think the 1962 event would be the boys event. which seems to have started in 1958, but I don't know any details about this event. The 1967 mens interstate matches were held in September. The matches referred to in your link (in February) were, it seems, junior v senior practice matches and he wasn't selected for the interstate event: Nigej (talk) 15:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
For Junior interstate see: for 1962. Played in 1961 too: but not in 1960 Also played in the junior event in 1963: and 1964 and 1965 Nigej (talk) 17:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much for your hard work. I have added all of the relevant information to his Team Appearances section. I noticed that there is a large overlap between his participation in the junior and senior events - just wondering but do you know why? I assumed they'd be mutually exclusive categories.
I have also noted all of the team events he appeared in the Team Appearances section. I think this may be too promiscuous, however, as a number of these events seem quite small. (The senior interstate tournament is the only one I heard of before I started his page.) For the Amateur wins and Professional wins categories we have have decided not all victories are worthy of inclusion (i.e. pro-am wins, schoolboy championships). Likewise, do we have criteria established to determine whether certain team events are notable enough?
Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:35, 12 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
The junior level in Australia in his day was under-21, later changed to under-18. It did mean that useful juniors could play in both. Didn't seem to be anything to stop it. Similar thing happened in the UK. There used to be a "youth" level, under-23, but at some point all the top amateurs were youths, so The R&A abandoned the "youth" level to concentrate on the boys age group (roughly under-18). Makes more sense nowadays. Nigej (talk) 19:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarification about the amateur categories. More importantly, do you known anything about notability criteria for the Team Appearances section?
Oogglywoogly (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Not sure there's any rules about the Team Appearances section. I guess anything that got significant coverage could be added but, personally, I wouldn't add minor amateur events. Nigej (talk) 06:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022 edit

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello Nigej,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here.   Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.


There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 9910 articles, as of 02:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

  • Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
  • If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
  • To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
  1. ^ not including another ~6,000 redirects
  2. ^ The number of weekly reviews reported in the NPP feed includes redirects, which are not included in the backlog we primarily track.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

1963 Australian Cup edit

One last thing about Bennetts. I have this link where he and his partner tied for the lead at the Australian Cup at the end of regulation. In the link they say the teams were going to play an 18 hole playoff the next week on December 22. I have scoured the newspaper search engines and found nothing. In addition, I checked the December 23 edition of the Sydney Morning Herald on Google News Archive and found no reportage of this event. (I also checked the Age and found nothing.) Not sure if you know anything of this alleged playoff.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Like you, I can't find any record of the playoff. Nigej (talk) 05:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok thanks.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 15:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Northern Professional edit

Hi there. FYI, I've been sandboxing the results and clipped many sources. See User:Wjemather/British PGA circuit#Northern Professional Championship. wjematherplease leave a message... 16:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC) .Reply

Yes, needs sorting out. Not always clear which events were Leeds Cup too. See: which has the honours board for the Leeds Cup. Some years missing 1950s to 1970s but I'm not 100% convinced that these weren't held. Nigej (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Wjemather: I'm still not 100% clear about the 1963 and 1964 Leeds Cup situation. The honours board has 1963 missing and Caygill winning it 1964. Most plausibly this was his win (which you found before) in the "new 36-hole tournament" at Manchester Golf Club ( which Caygill did win ( This was a new venture (involving some amateurs) and ran from 1964 to 1969 and sources are clear that from 1965 onwards the winner did receive the Leeds Cup. We also know from this that when the 1965 event was held Caygill was "the holder of the Leeds Cup", although annoyingly it doesn't actually say that he won it for his 1964 win in the same event. Confusingly this: from 1970 says that Muscroft "had previously won the trophy in 1962 and 1964", a statement that's difficult to square with what I've said above, and presumably relates to his NPC win in 1964. How Muscroft could have won the Leeds Cup in 1964 but Caygill be "the holder of the Leeds Cup" when it was contested in 1965 isn't clear. Nigej (talk) 14:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
I came across this which suggests the 1963 NPC (Caygill won) carried the Leeds Cup, but nothing to substantiate that. I'll look again when I have a bit of time. wjematherplease leave a message... 14:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
As for the NPC, I just have a couple of gaps to fill: 1977, 1983 and 1984 wjematherplease leave a message... 14:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on! edit

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Shennecossett Golf Course edit

I have spent the past few days adding a lot of information to the Shennecossett Golf Course page. I have noticed that the newspapers often refer to "Shennecossett Country Club" in my research rather than "Shennecossett Golf Course." They are probably referring to the same place and are simply making a little mistake. However, I wanted to consult with you before making more edits.

My misgivings basically revolve around the Connecticut Open (1910s event). (As full disclosure, I created that page.) In the course of my research for Shennecossett I noticed no mention of this early century Connecticut Open. For example, on the club's website, despite a comprehensive history section, there is nothing. In addition, in my research for the 1910s Connecticut Open they usually refer to "Shennecossett Country Club." Basically, I'm not sure if Shennecossett Golf Course and Shennecossett Country Club are different clubs. Any help would be much appreciated.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 01:57, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

They do seem to be the same club, as far as I can see. I suspect that it was called a country club until being taken over by the town. One of the scorecards here says country club and has the title "circa late 1960s". Nigej (talk) 06:55, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much. I seem to have overlooked the scorecard section earlier. Clearly the same club.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Nomination of List of Great Britain and Ireland PGA Cup golfers for deletion edit

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Great Britain and Ireland PGA Cup golfers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Great Britain and Ireland PGA Cup golfers 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 until the discussion has finished.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 02:55, 22 July 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Ted Webber edit

A Rhodesian golfer named Ted Webber won the South African Amateur Championship (golf) in 1977 and 1978. I suspect this is the same person as Teddy Webber who finished runner-up at the 1986 South African PGA Championship. If so we should keep the names consistent and probably the flags. Do you know if this is the same guy?


Oogglywoogly (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Must be the same person.Teddy seems much more common, eg Played for Rhodesia as an amateur and seems to have genuinely been from there. Despite the flag on the ET website he competed as a Zimbabwean from 1986 to 1988. Not sure why he's got a South African flag. Probably all mixed up with the politics of the time. In the apartheid days it was sometimes easier to be a Rhodesian/Zimbabwean (but sometimes not) but later sometimes it became easier to be a South African. "Majors of Golf" has "Edward Arthur Webber" (played in the Open 1986, 1987, 1988, missed cut each time) as his full name which fits with Nigej (talk) 05:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
See also which says he won 4 times in South Africa. Nigej (talk) 06:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the response. Yeah it's definitely the same guy. And thank you for changing the flags on the tournament pages.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

question about flags of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe edit

For Mark McNulty's win at the 1980 Malaysian Open there is this blue-ish flag with a the Union Jack in the corner. This flag also exist on the 1980 Asia Golf Circuit page. This appears to be similar to Rhodesia's national flag from 1964-68 (see Flags of Rhodesia). But clearly the dates don't match. (Meanwhile, under Flags of Zimbabwe they note the 1960s Rhodesian flag on the page but that's it.) I think it should probably change.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:23, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would think common sense would indicate that we use the flag of Zimbabwe here, enough though it only became Zimbabwe in April 1980. Using the Union Jack, per List of Rhodesian flags is surely just confusing. Nigej (talk) 12:56, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
If we are going to use the flag of the time, surely the UK one is correct (or possibly Zimbabwe Rhodesia, as that continued to be used unofficially), not that of Zimbabwe (or Rhodesia). I have updated it in the articles accordingly (i.e. UK). Any confusion is due to our use of flagicons without text, which has been touched on many times, but never addressed properly. wjematherplease leave a message... 15:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
I agree that the Zimbabwe Rhodesia flag would be a possible option. Nigej (talk) 15:07, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022 edit

New Page Review queue August 2022

Hello Nigej,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.
Open letter to the WMF
The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.
TIP - Reviewing by subject
Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.
New reviewers
The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.
  • Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
  • If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
  • To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

NPP message edit


Hi Nigej,


For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Question about sections edit

I have some questions about the sections we use in the text. Firstly, I have a question about the Early life section. Before I used to include very early life stuff like where the golfer was born, family info, and some very early golf anecdotes. But lately I've been enfolding all high school stuff under Early life rather than including it under the Amateur career section. I usually begin the Amateur career section when the subject goes to college (or around the age of 18 if he doesn't). What are your thoughts?

In addition, I am almost done with the page of Jerry Stolhand and have some questions about how I should organize the page. Stolhand had an unusual career arc where he turned professional, then had his amateur career status re-instated, but then turned professional a second time. I've heard of a number of golfers that have regained their amateur status but none where the golfer turned pro again. I created an independent section for each era of Stolhand's career but wasn't sure if that was the way it should be done. Any help would be much appreciated.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 03:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think we need to be too worried about the sections, it will be different for each biography. See Help:Section but I'm not sure its much help. Allen John comes to mind as someone who's turned professional twice, but it is unusual. Nigej (talk) 08:21, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok thanks. I will check the Help section when I have the opportunity to. Also, I actually just noticed that John Harris (golfer) and Joe Stansberry also had their professional status renewed. Maybe it's not as unusual as we think.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)OogglywoogglyReply
I just went through the advice page you sent me pertaining to Sections. Thank you but likewise I didn't find it very helpful; it seemed to focus mainly on technical stuff, not content. I think I'll just keep Stolhand's page organized the way it is.
One last thing... Could we create a separate line on the infobox for those that regained amateur status? On the page of Allen John we have it noted but it's on the same line as "Turned professional." To me, it looks awkward and jumbled. In addition, for the rare player that turned pro a second time, it would be nice to have a separate line for that too.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 15:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Could be done. I'll have a think about it Nigej (talk) 16:22, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok, please think about it. I think it would be worthwhile and probably easy to do as relatively few guys have had their amateur status re-instated.
Just to put it out there I will list all of the guys I know who have had their amateur status re-instated. They are Nathaniel Crosby, Sandy Galbraith, Steve Melnyk, Dillard Pruitt, and Bob Lewis (golfer). In addition, the professional golfers John Harris (golfer), Joe Stansberry, David Eger, Allen John, and Jerry Stolhand all had their amateur status re-instated but then turned pro a second time.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Bobby Jones' professional career edit


You have mentioned in passing that Bobby Jones turned pro sometime in his career. On his infobox, however, it is not noted. I have scoured the internet for this information but all I have is this website which says he turned pro sometime in the early 1930s. Do you have any more evidence stating when he turned pro? I think this is important as all you hear is the media is "the lifelong amateur Bobby Jones," "the greatest golfer never to turn pro," etc. but never anything about his professional career.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Seems that even at the time of his retirement in November 1930 he regarded his proposed future actions (like making a film) as against his amateur status: See eg when Lawson Little turned professional in 1936.: "he has decided to give up his amateur status and go in, with Bobby Jones, for the professional and business side of golf". I dont think he ever played for prize money, but there's more to amateur status than that. Even now, giving a golf lesson for money means you lose your amateur status and become a professional. Nigej (talk) 06:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Worth noting that we have Charlie Yates as low amateur in 1934 at Masters Tournament#Low amateurs when he finished below Jones (297 to 294). Nigej (talk) 06:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok, probably later tonight or tomorrow I will note the year Jones turned pro in the infobox and in the prose. Thank you for the links.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 16:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
I created a "Turned professional" subheading for Jones using some of the citations we referenced above. I also modified the infobox. If you can make any improvements, please do so.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Notability of wins edit


I have one more thing about Jerry Stolhand. I have included just about every potentially notable event he won in his Amateur wins and Professional wins sections. However, some may be dubious. The most potentially dubious ones I have listed below.

  • As a 15-year-old-boy he won his town's local Jaycee event. I included it earlier but now that I think about it it probably isn't notable. In addition, he won a similar event in 1953. What do you think about these events?
  • In 1956, he won a professional-assistant tournament in Wichita, Kansas. I know we don't include pro-ams but maybe these pro-assistant events are big enough? This type of event includes two professionals whereas the pro-ams only have one.
  • In 1966, he won the "championship flight" of the Barber's Point Open. (The "championship flight" appears to be the title for the "amateur division" back then.) But he didn't win the tournament overall against the pros. He won a lot of these "championship flights." I think these amateur victories should definitely be mentioned in the prose but maybe not in the Wins sections.
  • In 1965 and 1968, Stolhand won the Kaneohe Bay Youth Activities Association tournaments. This looks to be a charity benefit event. Not sure what our rules are about including events like this in the Wins sections.

Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks,

Oogglywoogly (talk) 15:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Not sure I can give any useful advice. Probably I wouldn't have included any of them. Nigej (talk) 05:14, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I decided to delete the two Jaycee events as we seem to have consensus that we don't include junior events in the Wins sections. With the other stuff, I decided to keep them, at least for now.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive edit

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Satellite Tour seasons master template edit

Hi, is there any way that you can amend the template for seasons from before 2013 as the Pro Golf Tour link does not work properly as it should be called EPD Tour from 2012 backwards. Thanks. Jimmymci234 (talk) 19:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Done (I hope). You might need to "purge" to get the new version Nigej (talk) 05:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Would you also be able to amend the template master so that PGA EuroPro Tour doesn't appear in templates from 2001 backwards. Alps Tour from 2000 backwards too if possible. I would do this myself, but not really sure how the template works and don't want to mess anything up! Thanks. Jimmymci234 (talk) 16:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hopefully OK. Nigej (talk) 19:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Team appearances question edit

Last night I mentioned this on the main talk page but no one responded. In the Team Appearances section we usually create separate "Amateur" and "Professional" subheadings even if the golfer only participates in one category. However, if the golfer is only involved in one category then it seems extraneous to include a subheading. I think we should delete subheadings in cases like this.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 02:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

My system is to not include a header for those who were always amateurs or for professionals who turned pro at an early age (eg Peter Alliss). However if someone was a professional then I include the "amateur" heading even if there is no professional section. Otherwise readers will assume its a professional event. Nigej (talk) 06:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ok thank you for the clarification. It was very helpful.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:11, 11 October 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Rick Hartmann's European career edit


I am currently creating Rick Hartmann's page. He played on the European Tour for 10 years. I have found a lot of stuff on pertaining to his club pro career in the tri-state area after he retired. However, I have found very little pertaining to his career in Europe. I know he didn't have the most sterling career on the European Tour but I figured I would've found more. (He had seventeen top tens including a second and third place finish.)

I was wondering if you had access to British newspaper search engines (e.g. The Times). If so, could you briefly search for Hartmann on them and see if you could find anything? That will help me determine whether I should sign up for them.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Refs for some of his best finishes: T6 1984 Timex Open (first event?)[1] 2nd 1985 Lawrence Batley International Golf Classic[2] T3 1985 Scandinavian Enterprise Open[3] T5 1986 Dunhill British Masters[4] 4th 1990 Carroll's Irish Open[5] T4 1990 Peugeot Open de France[6] Can't find anything that goes into any sort of detail about him. Nigej (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
(perhaps you already know but) He qualified for the 2000 PGA Championship with a top-25 finish in the PGA Club Professional Championship in June (after a playoff, 4 playing for 3 places tied on 223 - reduced to 54 holes by bad weather). However he withdrew "after the sudden death of his father, Lawrence, in Florida on Aug 5". He qualified again in 2002 - T16. see Nigej (talk) 17:35, 12 October 2022 (UTC)Reply


  1. ^ "Sam's 65 not good enough". The Glasgow Herald. June 18, 1984. p. 15.
  2. ^ "Belfry casts doubt on Europeans". The Glasgow Herald. July 15, 1985. p. 14.
  3. ^ "Baker-Finch shows he is a winner as Lyle slumps to a 75". The Glasgow Herald. August 5, 1985. p. 16.
  4. ^ "Win gives Seve a timely boost as he heads for US". The Glasgow Herald. June 9, 1986. p. 12.
  5. ^ Mair, Lewine (June 25, 1990). "Olazabal sweeps in with old memories". The Daily Telegraph. p. 34 – via
  6. ^ James, Richard (July 2, 1990). "Walton triumphs in play-off to win French Open". The Daily Telegraph. p. 42 – via

Hi Nigej,
Thank you very much for this information. I will most likely use all of it. Thank you for his father's obituary too. Though I knew he skipped the 2000 PGA due to his dad's death I didn't have the obit. It has some useful early life stuff for Hartmann.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022 edit

Hello Nigej,


Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022


  • There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
  • Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
  • Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
  • This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.



Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

ITN recognition for Peter Butler (golfer) edit

On 17 October 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Butler (golfer), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. TJMSmith (talk) 17:17, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Scottish Open columns question edit

Hello, I see that you recently undone one of my edits saying that there are three columns visible instead of two on wikipedia and it was a common mistake to make. How come I am not viewing three columns like other users ?. Thanks (talk) 21:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

It all depends on your screen size and your character size and font, and of course mobile phones will be quite different. Try ctrl+ (ie hold down the ctrl and press +) a few times to get big characters and then ctrl- a few times to get them smaller again. Nigej (talk) 21:23, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Just as an FYI, to mobile viewers like myself, they all list as a single column quite nicely. The thing about this is that we shouldn't try to "fix" a display to suit your own screen. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:53, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Rick Hartmann: lingering info edit


Thanks again for The Glasgow Herald articles earlier about Rick Hartmann. I think I used all of them. I'm pretty much done with his page but, as always, have a few lingering issues. They are listed below:

  • His precise date of birth. I have this link from Newsday which says he turned 50 shortly before May 8, 2009. Therefore he was probably born sometime in the spring of 1959. This is confirmed by a number of links from his early career in the Tampa Bay Times which also imply he was born in the spring of 1959. (Like here, for example.) However, I couldn't find anything listing his precise date of birth. Usually the ET website has it but his, for some reason, does not.
  • I was looking to see if you have any details about his performance at the finals of q-school. I know he made it to the finals several times but don't have any details. I have this link here stating that he was medalist at North Florida's 1983 regional q-school and made it to that year's finals held at TPC. It is implied in this link that he was unsuccessful in 1983 and probably the year before. As of the middle of 1986, he was unsuccessful three times. He says in that article he intends to try again late in the year. In addition, there is this Mike Lupica article from much later in his career stating that he never made it onto the PGA Tour.
  • Do you have any of the specifics about his South African Tour win at the 1984 Swazi Sun Pro-Am? Most of the info I got was from the tournament's page. I have this link but it is not a primary source and doesn't have much specific information.

Any information would be very helpful.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 22:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

See for the 1984 Swazi Sun Pro-Am. Also clipped this which has more detail. Nigej (talk) 09:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Drawn a blank on the other two. Unless you made it through q-school you rarely got a mention and since he never played on the PGA tour he's not covered by that. You'd think there might be something (eg a media guide) related to his last two majors 2000 and 2002 but I can't find anything at the moment. Nigej (talk) 10:44, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the Daily Telegraph article. Very helpful!
Yeah with q-school stuff, unless you made it in or tragically missed out on the last hole you will prob be forgotten. Thank you for trying though.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 16:24, 25 November 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

One last thing... On a tournament page it says that Hartmann finished runner-up at the 1989 Twee Jonge Gezellen Masters (i.e. South African Masters). However, on that page and in the Sunshine Tour sandbox of User:Wjemather there is no citation. In all of my research of Hartmann nothing popped up. I still included this information on Hartmann's page as it is one of his highest finishes on any big circuit. However, I would still prefer a citation. If you are able to find anything that would be very helpful. Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:37, 9 December 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

You can get the results through the Season Archives at (1990 PGA Summer Tour): but it doesn't give scores for this event. I've clipped a newspaper article here: I've added a reference to the South African Masters article. Nigej (talk) 08:05, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hi Nige, Thanks so much. I used the newspaper report as a citation.
And somehow I never came across the Sunshine's Tour seasonal archives before. I'm not sure if User: Wjemather or User: Jimmymci234 are interested, but isn't this enough to create seasonal calendars? I know OWGR archives were inadequate but these look pretty good.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:28, 13 December 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
The tour information centre has been updated with results from older seasons relatively recently. If I remember correctly, it didn't go back much farther than the mid-late 1990s. wjematherplease leave a message... 21:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
I hadn't really thought about it but you're right I think. see (randomly) eg: from late 2020 which only goes back to about 1990. Potentially useful stuff, although it seems to be missing the actual scores. Nigej (talk) 21:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Looks like the seasons pre-1975 are empty but perhaps a sign that more may be added on the future. Nigej (talk) 21:59, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Re-instated amateur status edit

Hey Nige,

Could we get this done? If their "yearpro" parameter is still populated we'll just have to deal with it; I personally don't think it's a big deal.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 16:34, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message edit

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

re: ANI discussion edit

The individual being called "a shit" by an admin is a long-term abusive individual. There is currently a discussion about having them site-banned on AN. Frankly, I can't blame the admins for being a little fed up with this person and slipping, this individual has made it their sole purpose on Wikipedia to antagonize others for their own fun, for years. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 18:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Louisiana PGA Championship edit

When I started the Louisiana State Open page we talked about how there was some confusion between the state open and the PGA event. I have link here that says that the 1958 events were played concurrently. Jerry Stolhand won both events. My question is... should both of these wins be counted in his Professional wins section? I think it should definitely noted in the prose (as I have) but it seems redundant for the Wins section. What do you think?


Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

creating a "Tour history" parameter in the infobox edit

We just talked about this on the main talk page. Could we combine the "Current tour(s)" and "Former tour(s)" parameters and create a "Tour history" parameter with chronology? If merging is not possible, could we delete the existing parameters and create a new one? I know this will be a lot of work but I think it can be done. As I mentioned earlier, I will create chronologies for everyone in the pre-All Exempt Era (and probably do more...). Please let me know your thoughts.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

early New York State Opens edit

I posted about this on the main talk page but no one responded. Not sure if you could provided clarity on the New York State Open from the early 20th century. It appears there was a tournament with the same title around 100 years ago but probably unrelated to the modern event. Do you know if it was PGA Tour-level? If so, it probably deserves a page of its own.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 23:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Looks to me as if the 1921, 1928, 1929 and 1930 events are regarded as PGA Tour events. Difficult to be 100% certain because of the lack of a decent published list. They appear here: but I'd say that was not a reliable source. See also: . This doesn't mention the 1921 event but see eg which also mentions a 1920 event won by Walter Hagen called the Bellevue Country Club Open. has some details. The 1920 event seems to be regarded as a PGA Tour event too, see
Got to say I'm doubtful about the 1944 event. Seems likely that it's actually the same event as the New York Red Cross Tournament. calls it "New York Open", no State. Also see eg which shows that the Red Cross event was sometimes called the New York Open.
I'm even more dubious about the Klein win in 1938. Can't find anything and I suspect its a mistake for 1928. See from 1957: "WILLIE KLEIN, golf professional for the past thirty years at the Wheatley Hills Golf Club, East Williston, N. Y. Mr. Klein was the 1938 New York State Open Champion and won the Florida Open in 1925." where 1938 is almost certainly a misprint for 1928. Nigej (talk) 11:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hey thanks for all the recent edits to New York State Open. I do think we should create separate pages for the early 20th century events though. It looks like the early 1920s event is a totally different thing. The 1928-1930 tournament was hosted by the New York State Golf Association but I don't think it has any relationship to the Met PGA (which governs the modern event). The fact that they all have the same name seems like a coincidence.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:24, 24 December 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Not a simple decision sometimes. Personally I'm not very keen on articles like New York Red Cross Tournament which have so little content and little prospect of expansion. I'm thinking that perhaps we could combine the early events with that, although I'm not sure what name we'd use, they're all PGA Tour event in New York State. As it says as WP:N, the events might each be notable but "Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article." Nigej (talk) 21:38, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Personally I would still like separate articles. I don't think combining would make sense; they seem to have little relation to one another except for the superficial commonality of their name. I would say we either make separate articles or don't make any new articles at all.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:46, 29 December 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
I'm not clear what article names you're thinking of. Would we retain New York State Open for the existing event? and then create New York State Open (New York State Golf Association) with a hatnote to it from the other article. And what about the 1919/1920 events? Nigej (talk) 08:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I would just keep New York State Open for the modern event. For the late 1920s event I would create a page entitled New York State Open (1920s event). For the earliest event I think it would be easiest to disambiguate by referring to it by its first name, Bellevue Country Club Open. All these events should be included go on a general disambiguation page.
It's a similar concept to the Connecticut Open and Connecticut Open (1910s event).
Oogglywoogly (talk) 17:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Wouldn't be my first choice but if you want to go that route its up to you really. Nigej (talk) 18:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I think I will create separate articles for the two early events. WP:N says that the topics need to be "related." In my mind, these NY state events are only very superficially related by the title. There seems to be no organizational relationship between any of the events. To me, it would be like saying that the Pennsylvania Open Championship and Philadelphia Inquirer Open, both PGA Tour-level events, were the "same event" if the Inquirer event was entitled the "Pennsylvania Open" for most of its history (which it easily could have been). Still, in this hypothetical example, they are still distinctly notable as they both had PGA Tour-level status and probably had a different organizational relationship.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Happy New Year, Nigej! edit

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 02:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Happy New Year, Nigej! edit

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Moops T 04:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Long Island PGA Championship edit


I recently found primary sources for most individual Long Island PGA Championship events. Right now I'm having trouble creating a fluid table for all of the events though. The event started as a stroke play event, briefly changed to a match play event, and then returned to stroke play for another 35 years. In the 1970s, however, it returned to a match play format (which remains). Basically I want to create one smooth table for the tournament. However, I would like to include "To par" and "Margin of victory" columns which are unique to stroke play. Is there a way this can be done or will I have to create four separate tables?


Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

You need to use "colspan". See eg Australian PGA Championship before 1964. Create the header with the "To par" and "Margin of victory" columns, but when it's a match-play final use "colspan=3" eg "colspan=3 align=center|1 up" so that the "1 up" spans 3 columns. Generally looks better with centering (ie "align=center") Nigej (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
Hey thanks. I made the changes last night. I'm not used to Source editing so it was hell trying to figure out but once I did it was easy.
One last thing. On their website, they do not note a 1966 champion. On I couldn't find anything either. However, for the 1977 reportage of the event they say that the 42nd event was held. Given that there was no 1946 event, there should have been a 1966 event. (The reporter, of course, could be wrong too.) What do you think?
Oogglywoogly (talk) 16:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
I found these: whoich seems to indicate there was one, but not much detail given. Nigej (talk) 13:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for digging these up. Right now, though, I won't include the information as I am suspicious about the second link. It says that the 1966 Long Island PGA was a two-round event and held in June. But during this era it was always a three-round event and, though it moved around a bit, never held during that month in the 1960s. It also implies that Nieporte won a team event. If you think the information is valid, however, you are free to include it.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
You've misread it. It says that by winning the LI PGA he got a place in a team event. Nigej (talk) 06:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
Hey thanks for the clarification and second link. It is now clear that an event occurred in '66 and Nieporte won it. I included the details on the page.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

snooker season 22/23 edit

Hi can I ask you a question. When you look at the above season does all the events finals sit on one line ?. When I view the page the finals are breaking into two lines etc. Why does it not sit all on one row like your view does please ?. (talk) 18:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

It depends. When I use my laptop with the new "skin" and the "wide" setting there is no wrapping onto two lines. When I change it to the reduced width ("toggle" is at the bottom right of the screen) then it does wrap quite a lot. On my mobile phone it does wrap. There are countless numbers of different devices with different screen sizes. Also people have different fonts and different character sizes, and they can change various setting in their Wikipedia "preferences". So for some people is does wrap and for some it doesn't. Making changes so that it looks better on one particular screen is no use, it often makes it worse for other people. If we make changes then we need to be pretty sure it works for nearly all users. Nigej (talk) 19:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I found that toggle you were talking about bout it only works if the screen is at 90% right ?. If you put it to 100% the toggle or zoom option disappears am i right ?. Sure that is no good. Is there anway around this ?. Why did wikipedia mess around with there layout ?. can you view the toggle when your laptop is at 100% ? Thanks (talk) 19:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

For me it is there at 100% character size (which I normally use). If I make the characters bigger it does disappear, I suppose it falls off the screen in some way. Looks like a bug to me. Logged-in users can simply go back to the old "skin" if they want (not sure about other users). The old "skin" is called "Vector legacy (2010)". If anyone does that, it will look exactly the same for them as it did before the change last week. Nigej (talk) 20:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

How come it is there for you at 100% and it disappears for me when i go up to 100 from 90% ?. i always use 100% character size as well, Do you know why that is please ?. (talk) 20:28, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Could be lots of reasons. We're probably using different makes of laptop with different screen sizes (I'm using 1600x900 I think). Maybe we're using different browsers. Different operating systems? Who knows. Why does everybody look different to everyone else? A million different reasons. Nigej (talk) 20:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

How am I banned ?. edit

I am afraid you owe an apology ?. You should now accuse people that you do not know ?. (talk) 15:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

User:DooksFoley147 is banned from editing the English Wikipedia. You and he show exactly the same editing style: an obsession with fields in snooker tables wrapping onto two lines, a keen interest in Oasis album sales and a habit of assuming that other people are completely stupid. Give us a break. There can't be two such people in the world like that, let alone two in Ireland. Nigej (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Midland edit

Not sure what happened there - I could have sworn it was the Challenge Cup article I was looking at! wjematherplease leave a message... 08:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think we've all done that a few times. Nigej (talk) 08:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

1970s vic am stuff edit

I am busy creating a page for Mike Cahill. I have some questions though. According to this link he won the 1971 Victorian junior amateur. However, it's just a secondary source. Not sure if you could find a primary source.

Also, according to these links here and here Cahill played on the Victorian team for the junior interstate series in the early 1970s. However, I noticed on your Australian Men's Interstate Teams Matches page that he was not listed. Are these events different?


Oogglywoogly (talk) 17:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

According to the 1971 Victorian boys event was won by T. Vogelzang and that's confirmed by this although its Vogelezang there. The junior event Cahill won was different see where its called the junior open. Not sure what the difference is between the two. Perhaps the junior open was open to boys from outside the state or perhaps they were different age groups. The junior interstate was different to the men's one, see but I don't know anything about it. Nigej (talk) 17:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm thinking that perhaps the boys was under-18 and the junior was under-21. Also note that the boys championship was match-play while the junior open was stroke play, Nigej (talk) 19:13, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarification. The only problem is that you can no longer access The Age links on in any form. I noticed this a few days ago. Not sure what happened. Maybe the website lost their license for the paper, a contract dispute, etc.
Nonetheless, without access to the links I did my best making the appropriate edits pertaining to Cahill's amateur career in Victoria. If you see any flaws, however, please make corrections.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 23:19, 15 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Yes. I hadn't noticed before but The Age has disappeared from 1956 onwards. I think they used to go to about 2000. You can still get most to 1989 on Google new archive: but the search facility there is useless, so you need to know the date. Nigej (talk) 08:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Wow, I am shocked. This is devastating to me as The Age was one of my top sources. Do you know what in the world happened with their relationship with
I'm definitely familiar with Google News Archives and I know you can get access to The Age through the site. But, as you state, there is no search function no unless you know precisely what you are looking for it is largely useless.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Hey, I just added the Victorian junior to his page. I characterized it as Victoria Junior Open Golf Championship.
In addition, I noticed that The Age was working today on Do you what changed?
Oogglywoogly (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Maybe it was because I complained. LOL Nigej (talk) 23:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Did you really? If so, it may have done the trick.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 04:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Got a reply from "Scott". He didn't address the specific issue, just said: "Sometimes content is removed/withheld from our site for legal/licensing reasons." Nigej (talk) 07:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

1972 amateur event edit

In 1972, Cahill played in some international amateur event against South Africa but I don't know which one it is. (The link I originally had from The Age doesn't work anymore but here it is anyway.) I assumed it was the Commonwealth Tournament but I checked the Wiki site and the event didn't exist in 1972. (I would provide you a Google News Archive link from that date, October 6, 1972, but they don't have that day's page for The Age either.) Do you know what event it was?


Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

It seems to have been a one-off match, arranged as a warm-up for the Humberto de Almeida Cup in Brazil and the Eisenhower Trophy in Argentina, that were in the weeks that followed: [1]. wjematherplease leave a message... 07:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it was clearly a warm-up match for the Eisenhower Trophy (the same 4 players), a really big event in those days. I've also seen Australia/New Zealand matches like that. His travels also explain why Cahill missed the interstate matches that year. Nigej (talk) 08:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Given that it was a minor event I think I will delete it from the page. But thank you for the information.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

1973 interstate team edit

I have an article here that states that Cahill made the 1973 Australian Men's Interstate Teams Matches team. However, there is no evidence that he played. I think he turned pro late in the that year which is why he may have been left off the team. Not sure if you know anything...

Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Clearly Don Reiter (not in the original team, per your reference) replaced Cahill. The obvious answer is that he turned professional, but I can't find any proof. Nigej (talk) 20:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks the clarification!
Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Halls Head Western Open: lingering info edit


I published the Halls Head Western Open last night. I had a couple reservations and posted these questions on the main talk page last night but no one responded. They are beneath:

  • According to an American newspaper, Peter Fowler finished in second place at the 1983 tournament. However, I could find no evidence that this event took place. Do you know anything of this alleged event?
  • According to another American newspaper, the Mandurah Classic took place in 2000. Do you know if it has any relation to the 1970s event?
  • Lastly, regarding the flags... do we really need them? I decided not to include them for this tournament. The Halls Head was a minor event and only Australian players finished in the top two. I feel like flags are really only necessary in big, international tournaments with a variety of nationalities.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hey Nige,
Sorry but do you have any information? Any help would be much appreciated.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
No, nothing I'm afraid. I suspect the 2000 event was for amateurs. Could have been other professional events but almost certainly not another OoM event. Until we have access to WA newspapers we probably won't know, Personally I'm happy not to have the flags. Seems pretty pointless for domestic events with little or no overseas participation. Nigej (talk) 20:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the response. I deleted the citations for the alleged later events. For the 1983 tournament, despite a number of searches, all I found was a source from a newspaper in Ohio that didn't go into much detail. Not that reliable. And I would be shocked if the 2000 event was continuous with the 1970s version.
Ok, I think a lot of these flags on other pages should be deleted. For example, on your Victorian Amateur Championship page almost all of the champions and finalists are from the same state in Australia. In the early years there were a few foreign-born champions but most were Australian immigrants. (In addition, I think most of the red links can be changed to plain text.)
Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:55, 28 February 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Past Papers edit

Thanks for your note about Past Papers. It is such a wonderful source and was very helpful for me when I created the page for Ted Douglas. If they significantly expand beyond the mid-20th century could you let me know?

In addition, do you know why they primarily stop at 1955? Seems a bit odd.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 01:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

1973 Bibiscus Coast Classic edit

In 1973, Terry Kendall won this event held in Orewa, New Zealand. In the article there is no mention of it being on the OoM. Nonetheless, I wanted to pass it off to you in the off-chance that it was part the circuit that year. (Fwiw, in your sandbox you do not label it as such.)


Oogglywoogly (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Tricky one for me. First thing to note is the misprint, it should be Hibiscus Coast. This article [2] does mention it as one of the "major events" but not one of the "big tournaments". Prize money of $5,000 was much less than the main events. I haven't found any money list for this season, which could confirm whether it was included in that or not. The Hamilton Charity event did not take place [3], but the Hawke's Bay pro-am series did, although the format was a bit unusual [4][5]. [6]] calls it a pro-am, however [7]] seems to indicate it was a bona-fide 54 hole event. Given that the Spalding Masters was included in 1972 indicates that perhaps the Hibiscus Coast event was too. Nigej (talk) 07:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
If it helps, in his annuals, Mark McCormack refers to the NZ Tour as a 5 tournament circuit in 1973/74 and makes no mention of the Hibiscus Coast event (or any others). Incidentally, he gives the leading money winners as Bob Charles ($10,000), John Lister ($8,997) and Robert Taylor (nearly $4K less than Lister) – although these figures don't seem to quite add up with those in the appendix, so perhaps other events did count. wjematherplease leave a message... 10:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
With such small prize money it probably didn't attract the leading players anyway [8] so it'll be difficult to work it out its status from a prize money list. With the McCormack information about the 5 tournament circuit I'm inclined to leave it out for now. Nigej (talk) 13:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you both for the information. I'll be sure to update Kendall's page with the correct title of the event. Meanwhile, I'd still assume the Hibiscus event was not on the Order of Merit. It seems to be a one-off, the prize money was small, and it was only 54-holes long.
Between your sources and the information of User: Wjemather, I would assume the NZ PGA was the other event on the circuit that year. It seems clearly the biggest event of the other four (or, I guess, three as the Hamilton event was cancelled).
Oogglywoogly (talk) 16:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

subheadings for Team Appearances section edit

This is small thing but I wanted to bring it up. For the "Amateur" and "Professional" subheadings in the Team Appearances section I was following your lead and using sub-heading #2. However, on the page of Mike Cahill the bot User:WikiCleanerBot has twice changed the size from subheading #2 to subheading #1. See a "diff" here.

Perhaps, we should start using subheading #1 from now on for the heading hierarchies in this section. What are your thoughts?

Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

(talk page watcher), you can't have subheadings that are of an order of magnitude lower than the one previous. If you are under a level 2 header, the next one must be a level 3 or above by design. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:08, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Normally we don't use headings for these, we just use bold, eg '''Amateur''' which appears as Amateur. Nigej (talk) 21:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank both of you for the clarification. In the future, for the Team Appearances section, I will be sure to use normal text and just emboldened it.
@ Nigej: Is this also applicable for the Professional Wins sections? Before I had been using subheadings (i.e. PGA Tour of Australasia wins, Other wins, etc). Should it just be normal text in bold?
Oogglywoogly (talk) 18:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
No, we normally use proper headings for those. Not 100% sure of the exact reason. The team appearances section is a bulleted list with a maximum of two groupings (amateur, professional), so perhaps it was felt that there was no need for anything to appear in the table of contents. Nigej (talk) 18:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the info. I'll make sure to maintain the same format for the the wins section.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Notice edit

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

the name of Naomichi "Joe" Ozaki edit

I've making a lot of edits to late 1990s Players Championships recently. Naomichi "Joe" Ozaki is referenced frequently however his name is not consistently spelled. Sometimes it's Naomichi Ozaki and sometimes it's Joe Ozaki. I noticed on most Wikipedia pages we just use his Japanese name. However, I noticed on the PGA Tour website that they use the name Joe Ozaki. I'm actually inclined to use his English-language name as this is an English-language website. However, I'm not sure what MOS says about this.

In addition, whatever we decide for his name should be applicable to his brothers Masashi "Jumbo" Ozaki and Tateo "Jet" Ozaki who have similarly styled names and other Asian golfers where this is relevant (e.g. Tsuneyuki "Tommy" Nakajima). Let me know your thoughts.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:24, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Tricky area for me. Personally I'm not at all keen on giving Asian golfers daft western-style names; it has racist connotations to me. However it was done (and still is eg Tom Kim). Quite why westerners can't use their proper name is a mystery to me. However, policy/guidelines say that we should be using the name used in reliable sources at the time (I think), so Jumbo is probably correct. Also note that the name we currently have for the article (eg Masashi Ozaki) is not relevant. On that basis Jumbo is correct. Note also per WP:NOPIPE and MOS:NOPIPE that the correct usage is the simple plain Jumbo Ozaki. Nigej (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Yes I think we should use the English-language names given that we are advised to "avoid making links longer than necessary." Overall, I think it is probably just laziness, not racism, that explains these nicknames. It's somewhat pathetic that journalists and broadcasters - whose primary job is to speak or write precisely - just can't do it. But alas, they didn't and standardized English-language nicknames developed. In addition, it's his first name on the website of the PGA Tour, his former employer. I think if he was uncomfortable with it he would have let them know. Lastly, for what's it's worth, if you type "Naomichi Ozaki" and "Joe Ozaki" in the latter gets way more results.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
In addition, if we have consensus between ourselves we should notify others members of WikiProject Golf on the main talk page. These are well-known golfers and many members edit pages related to these names.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Venue section for Players Championship edit

I think this section should clearly be deleted on all of the individual tournament pages (e.g. 1974 Tournament Players Championship, 1999 Players Championship) for this event. The Players has almost always been at the same course and the location is already noted in the infobox. Not sure if you have any other thoughts though.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 22:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Of course it hasn't always been played on the same course, only since 1982. The same issue applies to the Masters. One point is that the infobox should be a summary of what's in the article, so we can't use the presence of anything in the infobox as a reason for deletion. Another issue is that although the venue stays the same, the course varies from year to year in terms of length. Overall I'm inclined to think that a short section on the venue is useful. Nigej (talk) 07:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
I have changed my mind - what you say makes sense. Information from the infobox is only supposed to replicate information from the text. In addition, the length does change from year-to-year so that information should be there. My only caveat is that I'm not sure if we need a whole section for this as this section is usually limited to a sentence and one row.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

OWGR weekly archives edit

I recently created an Eligibility requirements section for the 2000 Players Championship. Usually I just need the PGA Tour Media Guide and the PGA Tour website to determine who got in. However, criterion #7 is a bit different as it refers exclusively to the top 50 in the OWGR. I went through the Official World Golf Ranking archives and easily determined who made this requirement. However, I have had trouble uploading this archive as a citation. (The main option I have is this: file:///Users/lightelligence/Downloads/Week%2011%20Ranking%20-%20Sunday,%20March%2019,%202000%20(2).pdf.) OWGR only gives you Microsoft Word or PDF as options to upload a document. Not sure if you know how to convert this document into a website - any help would be much appreciated.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 03:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Looks like you've downloaded it and are then tried to link to the downloaded file. That won't work. Unfortunately they changed the whole system last year and I'm now struggling to find the actual names of the archive files. Previously they had names like but that doesn't work now . Some of these old ones are archived in the "wayback machine" eg but that's not an ideal solution. The new names seem to be impossible to find. Not sure what the best approach is. Perhaps just to link to Nigej (talk) 07:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your effort. Yeah it used to be easy to cite these archives but not anymore. In terms of getting a citation here I think we're helpless but it's not that big of a deal because this criterion only affects a few players a year. Once again, thank you for your efforts.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 03:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

AWB edit

FYI, I noticed this edit did not amend the flags to flagicons, so have corrected it. I'm not sure if there are any others. wjematherplease leave a message... 14:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes. I was aware of it. 1974 too. Nigej (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
Perfect. wjematherplease leave a message... 14:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

2000 Players Championship edit

This one is just a curiosity thing. I was wondering why a number of golfers who qualified for the 2000 Players Championship did not play. Criterion #9 in the Eligibility requirements refers to the top golfers that year who were otherwise ineligible. Below is the list of golfers that got in through this qualification standard and their money list rank at the time:

Shigeki Maruyama (#11), Matt Gogel (#21), Robert Allenby (#22), Russ Cochran (#41), Naomichi Ozaki (#93), Trevor Dodds (#135), Ronnie Black (#140), Eric Booker (#169)

The first four guys make sense. But then there are a loads of golfers between Cochran and Ozaki who could have played (e.g. Robin Freeman (golfer), Jay Williamson) but did not. And in between Ozaki and Eric Booker there are even more (e.g. Craig Spence (golfer), Grant Waite, Joe Ogilvie). Do you know why so many elected not to play? I would assume that a lot of the alternates just weren't at the TPC prepared to play but wondered what you thought.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 03:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Tournament Winners criterion edit

I recently created an Eligibility requirements section for the 2004 Players Championship. Almost all of it is done however I do not understand criterion #4 ("Tournament Winners"). The 2004 media guide is not particularly helpful. The most detailed information I found was on page 17 of the media guide which lists the Priority Rankings. Criterion #33 refers to "Team Tournament Winners" but I suspect the Players Championship criterion refers to something different. I also went down to the Index of the media guide but found nothing.

I assume this category refers to golfers who won events in recent years that is not covered by criterion #1, the major championships criteria, or the WGC criteria. I suspect a lot of golfers that I have in criterion #12 actually qualified within the category. However, I have no evidence for this. Not sure if you could help me.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 01:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive edit

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Article patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
  • There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

main talk page post edit

I recently published a post entitled "What wins to include in the Wins sections??" on the main talk page. I know I post a lot on the talk page but this one is pretty important as I'm trying to firm up what wins we should post in the Wins sections. We've had a lot of discussions about this over the years (as I list in the post) but it appears we have yet to come to consensus. If you could briefly respond that would be nice.

Thank you,

Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Snooker lists edit

Nigej: You'll have noticed that I've been messing about with snooker lists lately (I like lists). I'm currently looking at the List of snooker players by number of ranking titles and would like to change all the Flagicons to Flagathletes, but I notice that the template specifies using {{flagicon|}}{{sortname||}} for the players' names. Is there a reason for this? Flagicons are particularly annoying when the current flag is different to the relevant flag (look at Silvino Francisco in the list for an example). Also I see no reason why we need to use {{sortname}} since the table is not sortable. So I've copied the list into my sandbox and changed the flags etc. and it all seems to work OK. Please take a look at it in my sandbox and let me know if you think it's OK? Alan. AlH42 (talk) 09:12, 12 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023 edit

Hello Nigej,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023


Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).


New pages patrol needs your help! edit

New pages awaiting review as of June 30th, 2023.

Hello Nigej,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.


Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Paul Barjon photo edit


I recently posted about this on the main talk page but no one responded. I am trying to upload a photo for Paul Barjon on his Wiki page. Specifically, I am trying to upload his photo from his KF win at Huntsville. The link is here.

I saved it to my Desktop and tried to upload it from there but it didn't work. Do I have to save this photo in a WikiMedia library or something and then upload it from there? Any help would be much appreciated.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 01:35, 7 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

1927 World Snooker Championship edit

Hi, 1927 World Snooker Championship is now a Featured Article. I just wanted to acknowledge all the great work you did there and on other snooker articles. Many thanks, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

List of male golfers who have been in the world top 10 edit

Did you give up on updating the Top 10 list? You where doing a great job.Tomrtn (talk) 02:22, 26 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Been out of action here for most of the summer. I'll have a look this weekend and hopefully get back in the weekly routine. Nigej (talk) 09:04, 26 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Tour season infoboxes edit

Hi, is it possible to amend the season infoboxes so that they can show more than 4 awards? Maybe there is a reason for this perhaps. Thanks Jimmymci234 (talk) 19:37, 30 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

No reason I think, so WP:BOLD applies I suggest. {{Infobox golf season}} seems to be only "semi-protected" so you should be able to edit it. Update the "Template documentation" too. Looks like it's been unchanged since Phinumu created it. Nigej (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Nigej: Thanks! Jimmymci234 (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Salem Country Club edit

I published a page for Salem Country Club a week and a half ago. I usually get an Approval or Denial from an administrator within a day or two of the publication. But for some reason I haven't heard back with this one. I think the content is clearly notable (USGA champions, top 100 in Golf Digest) and the page is about as complete as it gets. But even if the page isn't worthy of publication I would like to get a firm decision as it has been quite some time. I am bringing this up with you because you are an administrator and are capable of making these decisions. Any response would be nice.

Thank you,

Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:51, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Actually I'm not an administrator. Are you're talking about new page patrol. I gather there's a big backlog of articles needing review, see Wikipedia:New pages patrol. In case I have "patrolled" your article, since it is up to the minimum standard for articles. Nigej (talk) 06:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarification about your administrator status. You had approved a lot of my articles so I assumed you were an administrator. Also, thank you for your approval (or designating a "patrolled" status) for the Salem CC page.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 14:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

User:DooksFoley147 edit

He's back, using IP address. He's been updating the 2023 Shanghai Masters but the stuff he's done so far has been good so I've left it alone. Worth keeping an eye on though.  Alan  (talk) 06:51, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. I've not got the heart to undo this sort of stuff. Nigej (talk) 06:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Agreed. Best to avoid unnecessary arguments. I'll keep an eye on it while I'm watching the match, in case he starts updating scores mid-match as he used to do. Maybe he'll see this thread and desist.  Alan  (talk) 07:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, but I disagree with this approach. DF147 is site banned (not just blocked) for good reason; as such, any IPs they use to circumvent than ban should be reported to the appropriate noticeboard so they can be appropriately blocked before further disruption is inevitably caused. wjematherplease leave a message... 10:48, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
He is back again using . I just reverted one edit in the British Open.  Alan  (talk) 17:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Simon Hobday's sporting nationality edit

I recently did a lot of work on the 1978–79 Southern Africa Tour. Simon Hobday won the first two events, both in Rhodesia. He is noted in this link as "Rhodesia's top professional." Early in life, he also represented Zambia at the 1966 Eisenhower Trophy. However, his sporting nationality in his infobox exclusively says South Africa. If you could provide any clarification on this matter that would be helpful.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 02:17, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Japan Challenge Tour edit

Hi, I noticed recently that the Japan Challenge Tour article has become quite extensively long with the season tables all being on the one page. As I don’t think the tour carries enough notability to have individual articles for each season, I was considering moving each season table + money list to the relevant Japan Golf Tour season, similarly to what we have done with the Von Nida Tour. Would still keep the main Japan Challenge Tour article of course. Thoughts? Jimmymci234 (talk) 09:08, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Seems a good option to me. I certainly wouldn't want them as separate articles, probably never to be improved. Nigej (talk) 12:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Disambiguation edit

Sorry about that. I thought the disambiguation had been taken out, not added in. Got confused.  Alan  (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Snooker season 2023/24 and 85% edit

I'm sure I'm missing something; I hope you can tell me what it is. The edit history says the 80% change was reverted. It says 85% is the minimum permitted. Why and permitted by whom? (talk) 12:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

See eg MOS:SMALL in the "Accessibility" article, which says "In no case should the resulting font size of any text drop below 85% of the page's default font size." or MOS:SMALLFONT which says "The resulting font size of any text should not drop below 85% of the page's default font size." or WP:MOS#Formatting issues which says "The resulting font size of any text should not drop below 85% of the page's default font size." It's one of the reason we don't use small fonts in infoboxes, the text there is already smaller than normal. See also {{Small}}: "well below the 85% minimum specified in the linked guidelines." Nigej (talk) 13:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

November Articles for creation backlog drive edit


Hello Nigej:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2600 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

NZ circuit co-sanctioned events edit

Hi Nigej,

Thank you for recently publishing the New Zealand Golf Circuit page. I just noted the circuit status of three events in the tour column: New Zealand Open, New Zealand PGA Championship, and the Air New Zealand Shell Open. From our discussion earlier this year, we noted that the 1974 NZ Open and the 1977 Air NZ event were probably part of the Aussie Oom. However, I didn't include the "ANZ" designation yet as you know way more about this era than me. What are your thoughts about these events being co-sanctioned?


Oogglywoogly (talk) 22:43, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think it's clear that some of the later events were also on the Australian tour too, but which ones I've no idea. In the early years there was certainly some conflict between the two, so it's unlikely that there were any at the period. However they then seemed to get on better and it seems clear that from 1973 (when the Australian Order of Merit started) or soon after, NZ events were included in the OoM. Nigej (talk) 08:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Ok let's keep it the way it is until we get more information.
For the tour abbreviations, I originally put in "NZ" but User: Jimmymci234 changed it to "NZGC." I know this is a little thing but I think "NZ" is more appropriate. I feel like it is more in line with most of our abbreviations like "ANZ" (not "ANZT") for the Australian Tour and "EUR" (not "EURT") for the European Tour. I will not make any changes until I get consensus though.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
@Oogglywoogly: Just felt like a more natural abbreviation. Jimmymci234 (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
I suppose an issue here is to distinguish between this circuit and the later short-lived Golf Tour of New Zealand which was always abbreviated GTNZ. On that basis NZGC makes some sense, although there was a New Zealand Golf Council that that could perhaps be confused with. Maybe NZC is an option to indicate that this was always known as a circuit, never a tour. Nigej (talk) 08:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
It's referred to as the "New Zealand Tour" in McCormack, but then he refers to pretty much everything as a "tour", even if the official title is "circuit". I'll check if there is anything about the NZ events joining the Australian tour when I get chance. wjematherplease leave a message... 08:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
In the The Press, which is the only domestic source, it's never referred to as a "tour", always a "circuit" but a look at indicates that some overseas papers do call it a "tour", I suppose to fit in with local terminology. Nigej (talk) 09:11, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Jimmymci234, @Nigej: Given the information, I think "NZC" is the best idea for an abbreviation.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

@Nigej, @User: Wjemather: Thank you for your responses. I still don't know why there is confusion over whether this was a circuit or tour though. The only domestic source we have (which is clearly reliable) says it is a "circuit." Meanwhile, wjemather implies that McCormack is unreliable in this regard. I think it is clearly a circuit.

Do we have any updates on co-sanctioning? I would be very surprised if the top three events weren't co-sanctioned in the late '70s but, again, the evidence we have so far is weak.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 19:17, 14 November 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Requested move: Donald Ross (golfer) to Donald Ross (golf course architect) edit

Hi Nige,

Could you please attempt to make this move on Ross' talk page? We tried to change it to just "Donald Ross" but, as you know, that didn't work. It seems beyond clear to me, as I discussed earlier on the main talk page, that "architect" (or some variation) is far more appropriate than "golfer." It seems other users agreed.

I would attempt to do this myself but, as you said on the main talk page, "this sort of 'move' can't be done by normal users." Please let me know your thoughts.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 00:45, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Could we get this done soon? If not I will try to do it.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 02:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
I'll get it started. Nigej (talk) 07:56, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! I just posted on his talk page. I believe we will get an affirmative response soon.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Thor Chuan Leong (Rory Thor) edit

@Nigej: You undid one of my edits in the 2023 UK Championship article, and that's absolutely fine. Your revert said "If sources use Rory Thor that's what should be using here. The fact that our article for him currently has a different name shouldn't affect that in any way. That's for another discussion.". But surely our main source is the WST and his player page has his name as "Thor Chuan Leong" and his nickname as "Rory Thor". This was one we missed when doing the nicknames template so I have added it in. We have used his full name in every other tournament this season, so why should this one be different? sometimes uses his full name and sometimes his nickname - they are not consistent. The awful live scores website tends to use his nickname though. I think we should be consistent and use his full name without an unnecessary pipe which is why I made the edit (that you reverted) in the first place.  Alan  (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

See WT:SNOOKER where I've started a discussion. I'm not convinced that Rory Thor is really a nickname, seems to me it's rather like James Wattana, a westernised name that he used. You're certainly right that we shouldn't be using a pipe. Nigej (talk) 10:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

European Seniors Tour edit

Thank You for creating the EST articles! Part of the golfing history. Regards, EEJB (talk) 07:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message edit

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive edit

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wishes edit

Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Cedric Amm edit

I recently published the page for Cedric Amm. There are a few missing details, however.

  • His precise date of birth. I have this link that says he was born in 1940 or very early 1941. But then I have this link that implies he was born in late 1941 or 1942. Something is clearly amiss. Not sure if any of your major championship books have a DOB for him.
  • I did not find much information about his experiences in Europe. I suspect it is because he did not play well. However, if you have any Glasgow Herald data about any high finishes that would be helpful.
  • I could not find the final results for a number of tournaments he placed high in late in his career on any of the search engines. It is noted that he was near the lead at the midway point of the 1967 General Motors Open but I could not find any final round info. Later in the year he tied for the lead with Brian Barnes at the Flame Lily but, again, no final results. Two years later, he was again near the lead with Barnes, this time at the Western Province Open, but once more no final results popping up.
  • Lastly, I could not find any information about his career after the late 1960s. It's as if the guy disappears. The closest I found was some horse racing info referring to a certain Cedric A. Amm. A lot of people into golf are into horse racing but there's no way to know for certain if it's the same guy. If you know anything please let me know.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 18:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Not easy to find much but I did a bit of family history research. Found this [9] which has "C A Amm", perhaps indicating that the Cedric A. Amm may be the same person. However most golf sources just give Cedric Amm or C Amm. This [10] mentions Cedric Austin Amm and Barbara Carol Amm. Also found this baptism [11] of Cedric Austin Amm, born 5 December 1940. Unfortunately none of these sources mention golf so it's difficult to be certain that we're talking about the same man. Nigej (talk) 21:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Found this [12] "Former professional golfer Cedric Amm and his wife Barbara" which seems to confirm the connection. Nigej (talk) 21:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much for your hard work and doing it all so quickly. Although this generally could be construed as "circumstantial evidence" I think we can easily infer it's all the same guy.
A couple final things: with the Family Search site is it possible to clip the baptismal record? I'm not a subscriber. I just added the link to his page but would prefer more transparent evidence. Also, I don't know anything about horse racing and wasn't sure how to characterize his role. I referred to him as a "horse breeder" on the bottom of his article. If you can improve it, however, please do.
Merry Christmas,
Oogglywoogly (talk) 00:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply
Not quite sure what you want for baptism. For copyright reasons I probably can't make a permanent copy that you can use as a reference but i could create something temporary if you just want to look at the original (although I think everything useful is on the page I linked to). Nigej (talk) 17:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Try [13] Nigej (talk) 17:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the link but I'm getting "There was an error retrieving your file."
Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

Q Tour edit

Thanks for correcting my edit on the 2023–24 Q Tour page, I just realized that there are different Q Tours starting this season. Should we add all of them to the 2023–24 snooker season table then? It only has the UK/EU events at the moment. AmethystZhou (talk) 20:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

How many is too many? edit

@Nigej: Two issues. The first is regarding the ranking tournaments article. It is currently a bit short of references. I would like to add a "Ref." column but we would end up with over 400 references, mostly from Would this be WP:TOOMANYREFS? It would be a fair bit of work to dig them all out, but is it worth the effort?

The second issue is regarding the maximum breaks list. I have all the data for the referees (only two are unknown) and would be able to add footnotes for them in the same way that I did in the tables in the Triple Crown finals article. The only problem with doing this is that we would end up with more than 80 footnotes for referees. Again, is it worth doing?  Alan  (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

1: Personally I'm quite keen on the "ref" columns. One issue is the width of the table. I was thinking we could go down the line of the Maximum break article and remove the flags from the main table. See User:Nigej/Ronnie which I created years ago (mainly for my own interest) where the main table has a reference column rather similar to the one you propose. 2. I'm perhaps less keen on that idea. I see that [14] includes them. With all the references and footnotes, it could get pretty confusing to the reader. And I suppose the fundamental question is whether it's a sufficiently talked about topic or whether we're moving too much into the WP:NOTSTATS area. Nigej (talk) 22:37, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
1: I like the "ref" columns too. As to the table width, if you compare the ranking tournaments table with the minor-ranking tournaments table, the main reason the first table is so wide is not the flags but the two "age" columns which I think are unnecessary and could be removed. The second table has a "ref" column, and is OK because there are only 69 rows in the table with no more to be added. The first table currently has 417 rows, with many more to be added, and so the "References" section would become huge. So the question remains: "how many is too many?"
2: I agree that it's best not to bother with the referees in the maximum breaks list. There's probably too much data in that table as it is.  Alan  (talk) 12:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@AlH42: 1. My own view is that WP:TOOMANYREFS really only relates to using multiple references for one piece of information, generally to try convince others of the correctness of the information. I don't see that one reference per one piece of information is any problem. 2. I'm thinking the same. A complete list looks like WP:TRIVIA. Nigej (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
OK - I'll work on that in my sandbox and let you know when I'm done.  Alan  (talk) 13:46, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Nigej: Please have a look in my sandbox and let me know what you think. Will anybody object to the removal of the "age" columns? I don't think they are particularly relevant in this list. I've still got 138 references to find (indicated by "<R>") out of a total of 417. I've got all the easy ones, so the rest might take some time.  Alan  (talk) 10:24, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@AlH42: Personally I find the "age" columns pretty much the most useful thing in the table, so I wouldn't be at all keen on removing them. And I suspect the editor who reverted your original table thought so too. As I say I'd be much more keen on getting rid of the flags. Nigej (talk) 10:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Nigej: Have a look in my sandbox now. I've removed all of the flags (easy to put them back in should we so decide) but it made very little difference to the overall width of the table. I would suspect that the IP-user who reverted my edit did so because of the abbreviations I (misguidedly) used in the "Tournament" column. The "age" columns are much too wide, but would be considerably narrower if we changed (e.g.):
{{ayd|1932|10|08|1974|04|25}} (which displays 41 years, 199 days) to
{{age nts|1932|10|08|1974|04|25}} (which just displays 41)
but still sorts correctly. I've still got 130 references to dig out, but there's no rush. What do you think?  Alan  (talk) 09:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Nigej: Have a look in my sandbox now. I've dug out references for all 417 entries (will be 418 tomorrow). So we just need to decide two things:
  1. Whether to keep the flags or not. My preference is to take them out but I suspect there will be objections to that from some quarters.
  2. Whether to use years and days or just years in the "age" columns. Both types sort correctly (I've tested this), and using years and days makes these columns much too wide. My preference is to use years only.
Once we have agreed on these two issues, I will format the table to suit, and then run the archive BOT before migrating the table to the main article. Please let me know what you think.  Alan  (talk) 12:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Nigej: I see you've added entry 418 into the list. I've also added it to the version in my sandbox. I also have all 418 references. I need to get your decision on flags or no flags, and on ages in years only or years+days before I can proceed further. Please respond.  Alan  (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm still very keen on the full ages (both years and days) - to me they're the "value added" part of the table. I'd also be happy to remove the flags to save space - like at Maximum break. Nigej (talk) 15:32, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Done.  Alan  (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

1963/64 Natal Open edit

On the original winners list for the Natal Open it stated that Cedric Amm won the 1964 tournament. I recently created a Winners table for the tournament and maintained the 1964 date however it should probably change. According to this primary source, his playoff with Bobby Verwey was scheduled for December 31, 1963. However, I could not find a primary source for the actual win confirming the date. (I do have this secondary source confirming Amm's win overall.) Not sure if you could find a primary source for the playoff.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 08:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've had a look at this and can't find anything more than you. Nigej (talk) 20:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ok thanks for the attempt.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

sporting nationalities issues edit

I recently created a comprehensive page for the Natal Open. A couple of champions have ambiguous status for their sporting nationality though. All over Wikipedia, we have Sid Brews representing South Africa. However, according to his page as late as 1934 he was still representing England at the England–Scotland Professional Match. Perhaps his flag should change.

In addition, I have noticed that Stewart Davies, winner of the 1962 event, usually has the SA flag next to his name. (For example, see Engadine Open.) However, according to this link he "emigrated to South Africa" in 1958 from Scotland. I think the flag of the mother country should be next to his name as this is what we normally do even after the golfer moves to a different country. Any advice would be helpful.


Oogglywoogly (talk) 20:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

ITN recognition for Jack Burke Jr. edit

On 24 January 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jack Burke Jr., which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

ITN recognition for Malcolm Gregson edit

On 28 January 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Malcolm Gregson, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Snooker tournaments template edit

@Nigej: I edited the Snooker tournaments template because it was showing the "ranking points" Wikilink as redlined at the bottom of the List of snooker ranking tournaments page. I know that I did it correctly but it is still showing the old, redlined, version at the bottom of the list page. What's going on here?  Alan  (talk) 13:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

@AlH42: Looks OK to me. Perhaps a "purge" issue, which sometimes happens with templates. Top right under "tools". Nigej (talk) 14:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you - that was it. Learning something new every day.  Alan  (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Precious anniversary edit

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Championship League (invitational) edit

@Nigej: Could you please keep an eye on the Championship League. DooksFoley147 is back, and I don't want to risk reverting more than three times. Just one so far.  Alan  (talk) 14:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, clearly him. Nigej (talk) 15:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Geoffrey Sisk's amateur wins edit

I recently published a page for Geoffrey Sisk. I found almost everything I needed but some of his college wins are missing; I am missing four. (You can see them under the Amateur wins section.) If you can find anything please let me know.

In addition, one little messed up thing is background for the Major championships tables. I think I need to use source editing to correct that and am not too good with that. If you could correct that it would be great.

Also, I intend to do formatting tomorrow or the next day.

Oogglywoogly (talk) 05:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'd have thought that (page 5) was sufficient for referencing the amateur wins. Nigej (talk) 09:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I found this earler but was looking for third-party. However, this is probably our only option for the remaining four events. Thank you for your help.
Oogglywoogly (talk) 21:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC)OogglywooglyReply

1950 World Snooker Championship edit

Hi, I'll look into this more, but there seems to have been some fun and games in the run up to the 1950 Championship, and I was wondering if you knew any more about the dispute over the entry fee, and what happened with Jim Lees.

  • The closing date for entries was set as 1 August. In the Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer for Tuesday 30 August 1949 it's reported that Donaldson and Holt withdrew from the tournament in line with the PBPA's protest about the entry fee, leaving only Fred Davis, Sydney Lee and Jim Lees in the draw.
  • The draw published in The Billiard Player in October 1949 matches our current article, except it says that the winner of Kennerley v Barrie would play Jim Lees. Their December issue report about the qualifying doesn't mention Lees.
  • According to Kobylecky's book, Lees withdrew.
  • Sidney Smith claimed that he had been forgotten from the draw (Bradford Observer - Thursday 15 September 1949)

Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

No, I don't know anything else. Some of this seems to be related to the dispute between the BACC and the PBPA which eventually let to the split of the WC. Very interesting aspect of snooker history so well worth covering. Nigej (talk) 08:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I added what I could find to 1950 World Snooker Championship. Seems odd that Sidney Smith was not allowed to compete. Maybe he had a falling out with Joe Davis or the BACC? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024 edit

Hello Nigej,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards


Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.


MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive edit

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C edit

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

ITN recognition for Peter Oosterhuis edit

On 5 May 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Oosterhuis, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT•C 07:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply