User talk:QEDK/Archive 9

pageswap script for convenience

Hi QEDK, I noticed that at some point, you performed round-robin page moves. Thought I'd share a script here (js) that semi-automates page swaps for convenience. Critical opinion has been pretty good, and the script has been announced at WP:PMVR and the Signpost a month ago. You'd simply click "Swap" and enter a page destination, the script performs the 3 moves as necessary (saves time having to manually go through the move form 3 times). (It doesn't correct redirects afterwards, that's still manual)

Anyway, feel free to adapt this script as you see fit, and if it helps, cheers :) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 02:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

@Andy M. Wang: Thanks, I'll certainly look into your tool, sounds like a right fit. I was wondering if this is too much, but can you also make one to close RM discussions? --QEDK (T ☕ C) 02:00, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

QEDK, thanks. I'm surprised a bit that there wasn't an RM-closing script already (I haven't been using one if it exists anyway currently). A WP:MRV closer already exists, and I assume an RM closer would be somewhat similar. I might have time to look into this (no guarantees), thanks for letting me know. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:44, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for everything. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 17:23, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi QEDK, following up. I managed to whip something up for RM closes (again, I'm surprised such a script doesn't exist already). It is here (js). I've done enough testing to convince me it's reliable, and I've done two closes (one, two) using the script so far. Thanks so much for the suggestion. I'm considering announcing this at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves at some point — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 05:36, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll check it out. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 19:46, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

@Andy M. Wang: I was thinking of a few things. First, the tool can parse the wikitext and make the option available on the talk page itself. Second, restrict to only article talk namespace and thirdly, instead of removing the RM tag, just change /dated to /old, no need of adding the links ourselves then. Also I noticed the rationale field is copied onto the edit summary field, but sometimes a closing statement has to be expanded in order to justify all views. I'm glad you made this. :) --QEDK (T ☕ C) 14:58, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback :) I see what you mean by having it available in view mode. I haven't written that sort of JavaScript yet... might need some more time for that. Per WP:RMCI, {{requested move/old}} is optional, and I haven't believed it necessary to include a transclusion of this template every time an RM discussion is closed. I understand it may be useful for tracking purposes, but it's more concise this way in my own opinion, but this could be something for a second version of the script. FYI, I saw your recent page swap, and wanted to let you know that I created Talk:Lone Survivor (film) and Talk:Lone Survivor (film)/GA1 that became redlinks after the swap. (There were some incoming links to these, please remember to create these to avoid link breakage if possible) Hope this helps, and thanks again for letting me know. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 15:36, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you too. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 17:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

"Hijiri has been on ANI since forever"

Posting this on your talk page because I didn't want to shoot myself in the foot by making the ANI thread more TLDR than it already is, and it's not really related anyway. I also recognize that you said you were not saying it's my fault, and responding directly on that particular venue can come across as needlessly confrontational. I'm just clarifying why I think I have been on ANI forever.

My sig appears 10 times on the current ANI page and 24 times on the most recent archive, but that's because I myself am often a member of the peanut gallery. That is, I join the peanut gallery when I'm currently too busy with real life to do serious research and make good articles.

If you were referring to my bringing my own disputes with users to ANI once every few months (or them doing the same, or doing so repeatedly in the space of a month because the article content is not as "sexy" as transgender military whistle-blowers and keep getting archived without result), I think this is due to my tendency to edit in niche areas where other editors have been getting away with tendentious editing for long enough that they think it's okay. Tristan noir, JoshuSasori, Enkyo2, Juzumaru, CurtisNaito ... in all those cases the ANI peanut gallery unanimously agreed with me. But to the best of my recollection the only new AN/ANI threads I've opened against an editor I was personally in conflict with (rather than editors whose edits I had noticed by accident and didn't want to deal with by myself) in the last six months were related to Pldx1.

But I think your proposal is reasonable, at least in light of the evidence I posted. If you look through the archives, particularly at MOS talk, you might come to the conclusion that any voluntary withdrawal on Pldx1's part is unlikely, but if someone would close the thread with that as the decision, I would be happy.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:28, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

What you said is reasonable, let's see. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 10:44, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

NPR

Thank you for patrolling new pages. Please read the tutorial and apply the correct CSD criteria, noting the exceptions. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I've noted the odd mistakes. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 14:51, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello QEDK. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:15, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! :) --QEDK (T ☕ C) 07:57, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, QEDK. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

New Page Review - newsletter

Hello QEDK,

Breaking the back of the backlog

We now have 816 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.

Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

Talk:Baby-Baby-Baby

The banner that you added in RM is misleading. Can you remove it or replace it with something else? --George Ho (talk) 09:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@George Ho: I do not recall adding any banner, can you give me pointers as to what you're referring to? --QEDK (T ☕ C) 09:11, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The one at Talk:Baby-Baby-Baby#Requested move 26 November 2016. --George Ho (talk) 09:12, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to guess, you're talking about the RM rag itself. I believe alternative procedure states that you can change /dated to /old - hence, closing the function of the tag and also serving the purpose of putting out what the crux of the move request was. Is that what you're referring to? I do not mind if you change it, but I think it's perfectly fine. If the template detects the page has been moved, it says "Page move completed" or something, or else it tells you that a discussion has taken place. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 09:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh... I misread the banner myself. I just got sleepy and tired. Time to rest for now. --George Ho (talk) 09:22, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Closing move discussions

Hi, I noticed that you are not adding {{RMNAC}} in your closing comment. Please remember to add that. Regards, Fuortu (talk) 19:10, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Everywhere else, non-admin closure tag is supplementary. The rule you're talking about is just a misplaced convention. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 20:39, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

According to closing instructions, "any non-admin closure 'must' be explicitly declared with template {{RMnac}} placed directly after the reasoning for the close within the {{RM top}} template". Regards, Fuortu (talk) 09:55, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I checked the instructions. I'm saying that RM just happens to be only place that such a thing is made compulsory, and hence, I said misplaced convention. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 17:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Reverted your close

Hi; I reverted your close at Talk:Fossil fuel phase-out, as you already noted there. Your close was malformed (didn't actually close it), didn't acknowledge that it was a non-admin close, and sounded more like a statement of position than a neutral analysis. If you're going to be closing discussions, you need to understand how to do it, and be impartial. Now that you've stated an explicit position, we can wait for someone else to close, instead of patching up the problem yourself. Dicklyon (talk) 18:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

What? I think you're the one who doesn't understand - the close was completely impartial, it was you who reinforced his view by reverting a close. I like how you put this up as a facade, when in reality the only reason you called it out on your seemingly "malformed" grounds is because someone closed it with a stance opposite yours. I closed the discussion, if not the template, you could've easily just fixed the tag but you just needed a suitable excuse, didn't you. Thanks for coming by! :) --QEDK (T ☕ C) 19:04, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

New Page Review - newsletter #2

Hello QEDK,

Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

• Improve the tools: Vote here.
• Reduce your review load: Vote here

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .

Reverted your close II

I reverted your close at Talk:Hurricane Tina (1992). First, you did not identify your close as being non-admin. Second, non-admins should only close RMs where there is an obvious consensus. This is not one of those. Let an admin field this one. --В²C ☎ 21:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't know what established procedure you're referring to when you say that non-admin can't close discussions with no "obvious" consensus, but I'm glad that you decided to push your viewpoint like this. Well done, your objective is completed. QEDK (愛) 06:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Before you close any more RMs, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the relevant instructions Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Closing_instructions. --В²C ☎ 20:57, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I recommend you learn the difference between "being cautious" and "disallowed". --QEDK (愛) 18:00, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Countdownalt

Template:Countdownalt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom

Is this...not at the point where ArbCom is actually necessary? There's so many editors and admins and proposals, I really don't see any individual admin closing it. But honestly, so many people are involved, I don't know who would even make that call. TimothyJosephWood 03:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Not really, it's mostly on one person, even though the discussion might have sprawled across ANI. AC is last resort, atm Avi's close holds and it is the targeted remedy that I was looking for, so no problems. --QEDK (愛) 10:29, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Boy is that a heckuva close summary. TimothyJosephWood 11:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk (sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC))

Re: Jmolinelli

Hi,

I was a bit confused by your comment there. NailanOnd (the alleged sock) has not edited any page besides John L. Molinelli. Did you mean the alleged master?

Thanks,

GAB^gab 19:08, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that. My bad. :P --QEDK (愛) 17:54, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.2

Hello QEDK,

A HUGE backlog

We now have 816 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.

Hitting 17,000 soon

The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.

Second set of eyes

Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.

Abuse

This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and

1. this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
2. this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
3. This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.

Coordinator election

Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

WP:INCUBATOR

I invite you to comment on as well as to endorse my idea of article incubator. The idea is not new and details of the previous version can be found at WP:INCUBATOR. I would be glad if you enhance it with your experience. Feel free to improve upon the proposal that I have placed. Anasuya.D (talk) 09:47, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Missing move rationale

Greetings QEDK! In your recent close of multiple page moves at Talk:Immigration policy of Donald Trump#Requested move 2 February 2017, you write "pages moved per clear consensus" and you add the precedent of the Obama case as a supporting argument. However you do not provide any analysis of the discussion, which has several Oppose votes with reasonable rationales, and where we even see some supporters of the move concede that the opposition makes some fair points. Accordingly I do not see a "clear consensus" in this discussion and I am considering sending it to move review. Looking forward to your comments. — JFG ^talk 18:40, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

It's a 13 for 5 against, I'm sorry but there's a clear majority who wanted it to be moved. It is fine if you want an analysis but that's not reason enough to overturn. Either way, you have it where you wanted it. --QEDK (愛) 21:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with JFG. You shouldn't just be vote counting - see WP:NOTAVOTE. You need to provide a reason why the opposes are invalid. Also, I don't think you're an admin, and you haven't used the {{rmnac}} template. This seems a somewhat contentious close for a non-admin, particularly without any sort of explanation (initially) or analysis of arguments.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

No one is rejecting that you're wrong and I didn't say that I was absolutely correct in not putting more analysis in the rationale but I've gone ahead and done it. In any case, you're free to seek a move review, if that is your wish. @Amakuru and JFG: I wish to add, the tally was taken as a thumbrule, there's not really a reason to use only that, but a straw poll does indicate where majority lies and that was it, considering all the editors were somewhat established, there's not really no reason to not hold them into account, because any agreement just translates to agreement with the nominator. Good day to you! :) --QEDK (愛) 04:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections

Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Move review for Immigration policy of Donald Trump

An editor has asked for a Move review of Immigration policy of Donald Trump. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. — JFG ^talk 08:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.3

Hello QEDK,

Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.

Still a MASSIVE backlog

We now have 816 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello QEDK,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 816 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Celebrating 7 years of editing

Hey, QEDK. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Mz7 (talk) 02:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if automated or not (and I don't want to presume) but thanks a lot. :) --QEDK (愛) 16:15, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

RfA nom

Hello! I was thinking of running a candidacy for adminship and I was looking for nominators. Would you mind looking into my history and evaluating me with your criteria? --Kostas20142 (talk) 10:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

It's been less than a year for you on this site and you have close to 5k+ edits, but the community here demands much more from its candidates (not 2007 anymore), most of which are unrealistic. Now, I'm saying this with reservations but I don't think they'd be willing to promote you yet. There's a wide range of requirements: content creation, participation in discussion, correct AfD votes, no history of incivility, maliciousness and a strong grip on enwiki policies. I think I don't know you enough to evaluate you as an editor since I haven't seen you around (I haven't been much around either), but what's to remember is that, there are people who will objectively oppose because they feel you're not a net positive enough to deserve admin rights. What is your choice is yours, but these are just my 2 cents. :) --QEDK (愛) 17:02, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

CSD responses

Hey, this is a message to follow up on our Github conversation regarding CSD responses— want to make sure this is you before I lay out my suggestions! Just ping me and I will respond with the info you asked for (and if this is NOT the person I interacted with via Github, pls let me know that too!). Thanks! KDS4444 (talk) 20:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

@KDS4444: Haha, nope. This is the bona fide genuine QEDK who spoke to you before. At your service. :) --QEDK (愛) 21:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

B4 clarification

A clarification to WP:UP/RFC2016 § B4 has been proposed. You participated in that discussion; your input is welcome at Wikipedia:User pages/RfC for stale drafts policy restructuring/B4 clarification. Thanks, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 16:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

AN/I

As you participated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive957#Proposal: One-way IBAN on Godsy towards Legacypac, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposing IBAN between Godsy and Legacypac. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 03:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Snowsleeping

Hi, I see that you are a clerk so I want you to make a decision on the case I filed to see wheter the 2 account that I suspected are socks. Thanks! TheNewSMG (talk) 18:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

• On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
• Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Family Guy post RfC discussion

Please accept my apologies for disturbing you but I am trying hard to work towards a resolution at the discussion at Talk:Family Guy. However, there are "issues". Earlier, you indicated support for either "animated sitcom for adults" (with appropriate wikilinks) or "animated sitcom targeted at adult audiences" as the new text. Could you please visit the discussion again and confirm whether or not you are still willing to accept this wording? Thankyou. --AussieLegend (✉) 23:27, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

promotion to full SPI clerk

After consulting with other CheckUsers, I'm happy to tell you you've been promoted to full SPI clerk. It's long overdue – congratulations, and thanks so much for your hard work. :-) Katie^talk 16:31, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again, reiterating my message on the Clerk noticeboard, I'm glad to be of any help. --QEDK (愛 • 海) 17:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

EFH granted

Hi QEDK, I have enabled EFH on your account per my close. In my permission change reason, I accidentally linked to the incorrect thread at EFN -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 20:09, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. And I don't mind the small error, it's all fine. --QEDK (愛 • 海) 08:37, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, QEDK. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Kostas20142 (talk) 15:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss the soon to built, Interaction Timeline

Hi Checkusers and Checkuser clerks,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building the Interaction Timeline feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you use similar tools such as the Editor Interaction Analyser and User compare report during sockpuppet investigations.

You can leave comments on the on wiki discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Interaction Timeline alpha demo is ready for testing

Hello,

The Interaction Timeline alpha version is ready for testing. The Anti-Harassment Tools team appreciates you spending a few minutes to try out the tool and let us know if there is value in displaying the interactions in a vertical timeline instead of the approach used with the existing interaction analysis tools.

Also we interested in learning about which additional functionality or information we should prioritize developing.

Comments can be left on the discussion page here or on meta. Or you can share your ideas by email.

Thank you,

For the Anti-Harassment Tools Team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 21:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving

	Happy Thanksgiving
	A little early, but still... Wishing you a day of celebration, relaxation, and happiness. If you don't celebrate, pass this on to someone who does! -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:15, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot and you too. Happy holidays! (if they've come because mine are still far off :/) --QEDK (愛 • 海) 05:54, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Greetings

Hello QEDK: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 16:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

To you too. :) --QEDK (愛 ☃️ 海) 08:00, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas QEDK!!


Hi QEDK, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
   –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 13:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Much thanks and to you too! :) --QEDK (愛 ☃️ 海) 08:18, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Metal Gear (weapon) move relist

Just a heads-up: I had to adjust your relist template; the substitution of {{relisting}} must always be directly after the nominator's or the most recent relister's signature, as well as must be on the same line. Otherwise, RMCD bot is not able to detect the substitution of {{relisting}}, resulting in the discussion remain in the backlog section of Wikipedia:Requested moves instead of the section that represents the day of the most recent relist. Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

For the record, here's RMCD bot's edit after the relist was fixed, showing up in the December 26 section since that was when you posted the relist. Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Much apologies for the inconvenience; I wasn't aware of such an existing problem. Thanks again and happy holidays! --QEDK (愛 ☃️ 海) 19:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, QEDK!

Happy New Year!

QEDK,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
-- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 23:34, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

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

This must've gotten lost in the new messages. To you too (albeit, v belated)! --QEDK (桜 ❄ 伴) 20:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello QEDK, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Emirates of the United Arab Emirates

Dear QEDK, you've recently left a warning on an IP user's talk page regarding their vandalism. Unfortunately, only the last of their edits has been undone. There are intermittent manual reversion attempts, so i cannot undo them easily.

Can you roll back the article to the last un-vandalised version? I don't want to do a messy manual reversion if avoidable. (There was one more suspicious edit a long time ago, but I'll look into it manually after the rollback.)

Please leave me a notification after taking action or making a decision, so I can clean up the rest. Thanks for looking into it. :) Se'taan (talk) 04:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@Se'taan: It seems like people have edited after me, so I cannot restore revisions as of now. I did not edit the article you have linked to unfortunately but another one and other editors are working on the resolution so I guess it's fine. Good luck and happy editing! --QEDK (後 🌸 桜) 14:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the quick response. We'll get it done, now that quite some people are on it. Best whishes! Se'taan (talk) 20:26, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Re :RFA

Just to finish our conversation from here, I'll assure you I don't consider opposition to an RFA to be a big deal. I know I didn't lose sleep over it, nor do I even bother to remember who supported and who opposed. The problem was mostly of not waiting long enough after an ugly situation. The community is pretty bad at dealing with one-offs shitshows, this was no different. Hard cases make bad law, as they say. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Good for you. I personally have not delved into the matter enough to opine on it, I was just talking about your issues relating to it, that's all. --QEDK (後 🌸 桜) 08:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/331dot#Oppose

I'm confused. Who said anything about censoring or removing comments? My statement was more about disruption. The two pages of debate that regularly accompanies one of these !votes is more disruptive than the original comment usually is. That's all. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I was talking about the debate centering him, the topic ban. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 17:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for the explanation. Seeing as how the ANI thread was closed and archived months ago, I did not think I was encouraging anyone to re-propose sanctioning them. I simply meant to reference that a robust debate on appropriateness has already happened. I suppose it could be inferred that I was encouraging readers to censure or ignore them. To the extent any implication was intended, it was that another new discussion was not necessary. I hope this helps, and thanks again. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:09, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I actually agreed with you about the fact that we should disengage debating regarding his opposes because they have always resulted in unfruitful extended debate. Apologies about the miscommunication, if that suffices. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 18:16, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

It certainly does. Best wishes. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

ITN recognition for March 2018 Kabul suicide bombing

On 25 March 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article March 2018 Kabul suicide bombing, 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

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

ACTRIAL:

• ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

• Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

• While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

• The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

---

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

Interaction Timeline V1.1

Hello QEDK, I’m following up with you because you previously showed an interest in the Interaction Timeline. The Anti-Harassment Tools team has completed V1.1 and the tool is ready for use. The Interaction Timeline shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits.

The purpose of the tool is to better understand the sequence of edits between two users in order to make a decision about the best way to resolve a user conduct dispute. Here are some test cases that show the results and also some known limitations of the tool. We would like to hear your experience using the tool in real cases. You can leave public feedback on talk page or contact us by email if the case needs discretion or you would prefer to comment privately. SPoore (WMF), Trust & Safety, Community health initiative (talk) 16:16, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Module:Countdownalt

Module:Countdownalt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

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

ACTRIAL:

• WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

• Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

• A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

• There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

• Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

• A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

• Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
• The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

---

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

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

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

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

• As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
• Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
• Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

---

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

How can the Interaction Timeline be useful in reporting to noticeboards?

Hi QEDK,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team built the Interaction Timeline to make it easier to understand how two people interact and converse across multiple pages on a wiki. The tool shows a chronological list of edits made by two users, only on pages where they have both made edits within the provided time range. Our goals are to assist users to make well informed decisions in incidents of user misconduct and to keep on-wiki discussions civil and focused on evidence.

We're looking to add a feature to the Interaction Timeline that makes it easy to post statistics and information to an on-wiki discussion about user misconduct. We're discussing possible wikitext output on the project talk page, and we invite you to participate! Thank you, For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF), Trust & Safety, Community health initiative (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

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

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

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

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

You've got mail!

Hello, QEDK. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:14, 2 September 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

GAB^gab 03:14, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Replied. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 04:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in Eastern Europe. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

—SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 13:27, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks about something of grief but.....

As I sat glued to the television, I wondered the prospects of an article but refrained in light of NOTNEWS and all...... Any thoughts? And, the red linked Majherhat Bridge can be safely redirected to this one; that will be it's best and near-sole significant coverage, in years of existence.Some details about the bridge can be added later.....∯WBG^converse 16:58, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't even live there anymore (and where I live now doesn't have a TV unfortunately), but grave disappointment is where I'm at. Personally, I like to think that even if people forget these people died, there's a reliably sourced article that tells them this had happened. And considering this is the third one in a while, kudos to the general population for making it through alive everyday. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 17:06, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your work at the Majherhat Bridge

	Bridging gaps(in the encyclopedia)....
	Your work in covering the majherhat bridge collapse is appreciated...  — fr + 03:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 16:29, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

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

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

• The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

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

Other

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

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

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

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

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

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

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

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

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

Backlog

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

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

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

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

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

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

Hello QEDK,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

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

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

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

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

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, QEDK. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello QEDK,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:Users with shared IP addresses has been nominated for discussion

Category:Users with shared IP addresses, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. VegaDark (talk) 10:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

MOS:LIFE

Thanks for the reasoned RfC closure. I modified [1] your changes to MOS:LIFE, because WP:Writing policy is hard. :-) It needs to be worded "just so", or a firehose of wikilawyering is likely. (I also linked a bunch of stuff, so people can look at the articles and see that they are broader groups not breeds or cultivars).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

No issues. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 06:42, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello QEDK,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Mute notifications

You may elect to mute persons attempting to notify you at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo. Just as an FYI. --Izno (talk) 15:46, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Didn't know that was there. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 15:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings#Urgent: Tell Twitter and YouTube to remove these accounts that belong to the perpetrators of the attacks

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings#Urgent: Tell Twitter and YouTube to remove these accounts that belong to the perpetrators of the attacks. 2600:1700:BBD0:8050:796A:F7DB:EFDF:F2A6 (talk) 05:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

PA

If you are unable to sort out the semantics of my comments rather than striving to take them out of context, you would nevertheless do well not to use a unconnected incident as a platform for making personal attacks. You are certainly well aware that admins are not allowed to defend themselves against such behaviour - if I were not 'involved;' you could consider yourself warned. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:50, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

So your response to being called out for personal attacks is threatening the non-administrator with no ability to prevent such an action? Way to go. It's reassuring seeing an admin of your stature threaten another editor on the basis of their own mistakes, also noting how you had time to threaten me but didn't dare to speak out against your fellow administrator and the other editors who also has issues with your less-than-satisfactory vote. Next time you threaten me or another editor, I will take you to ANI, despite the timesink it may be. --qedk (t 桜 c) 13:04, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit request

I picked up your edit request at Template talk:SPI archive notice#Template-protected edit request on 28 April 2019. It touches on a couple of the issues I've hit at SPI recently.

Looks like our palette of options are,

• m:SRG
• Checkuser, who can send an email to CU-l.

This lies (I think) somewhere between the existing text and your proposed text.

As a personal side note, rather than something to be documented in a template, There'sNoTime (talk · contribs) holds both Steward & Checkuser.

It's comforting to see I'm not the only one to receive a #PA message from K.

-- Cabayi (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I think a notice for checkusers is not necessary, as they can (and are the only ones who can) use the mailing list. It's better as a standard note for SRG. Maybe add, "Checkusers can send an email to the checkuser mailing list, if required." And on the side, it is mildly comforting knowing I'm not the only one either. --qedk (t 桜 c) 09:08, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

References

"Unicode block" renamings

Thanks for your help with "(Unicode block)" the moves. I left a message in Talk:Unicode block about the rest of my proposed renamings. Let's see. no reply so far. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 18:18, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Jorge Stolfi: so a couple of things. I noticed you made a thread on the talk page, but to use the Requested move process, there's some prerequisites, one of them is adding a template and formatting your proposal exactly according to a format. The instructions are given here. I noticed you put a lot of articles in, and listed some that don't need to be moved, the way it has to be done is that you list only the current names and target names (the exact format is given in the instructions). Then, in your requested move proposal, you can use some of the "no need of a move" articles as examples. Here's a good example of a closed single-page move: Talk:Iyami Aje#Requested move 2 April 2019. Here's a good example of a still open multi-page move: Talk:List of Governors of New York#Requested move 11 April 2019. Take care to not copy-paste any templates, you will need to subsitute them to make the RM work exactly. Hope that helps. --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi, I appear to have reverted your edit on RHaworth talk page. My apologies, I've reverted myself! Regards, Mahveotm (talk) 16:01, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

No worries, happens to the best of us! --qedk (t 桜 c) 17:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, QEDK. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Just Chilling (talk) 22:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Replied. --qedk (t 桜 c) 06:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)