User talk:Rangasyd/Archive 10

Formatting Pirates of the Caribbean cast members

Hi Rangasyd. Thanks for your edits, but I created the list according to List of Star Wars cast members and List of Harry Potter cast members, in which "Principal cast" is a section, "Main characters" is a section, etc. Don't you think is better to put "Main characters", "Secondary characters" and "Minor characters" as sections? Greetings. Tajotep (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Tajotep: I take your point and have reinstated the section breaks. Cheers and happy editing. Rangasyd (talk) 06:14, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Royal Commissions

Thanks so much for creating that page - it'd been on my to-do list forever but I'd always struggled to come up with the sources to put together a useful list. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: Thanks for your thanks. One less 'thing for you to do!' Rangasyd (talk) 06:35, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

No need to get rude about it. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:57, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

It was meant to be funny. :-) Rangasyd (talk) 09:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

"The Rocks" in Sydney

Hello, I noticed you had removed the photo I added of the First Impression Sculpture from The Rocks, Sydney page, from my visit there in 2006 (see here). Can you provide an explanation for that edit? I realize it was only a small part of your edit but I thought it was a worthwhile image to have in that gallery... --Egpetersen (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Egpetersen: Hi. Thanks for your message. The image seemed focused on the person in the photo and less on the sculpture. There were other distracting elements to the photo (e.g. shade, background, focus, etc.) If the image was cropped to simply focus on the sculpture it may be worthy of inclusion; but I don't think so in its current state. It's worth noting that most of the images in the article are of historical/heritage-classified buildings, which is reflective of the importance of The Rocks in Australia's European history. With around 500 images of The Rocks saved in Wikimedia Commons, a more recent sculpture is of less importance to the suburb's character and the distracting elements (person and shade) resulted in a subjective assessment on image quality; and hence rejection. The image is located in Wikimedia Commons, a link to which can be found at the foot of the page. Are you or a person that you know the person in the image? Rangasyd (talk) 15:26, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, yeah, it's a picture of my mom standing by the sculpture. I figured the fact that she was in so much shadow made it OK to put out, since the focus is really the sculpture itself and not her. I didn't really consider them "distracting". Ultimately, this is not a big deal, and I'm not putting up any kind of argument or fuss. Your reasoning is sound and I'm willing to let the matter drop. Thanks for the response. --Egpetersen (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Rangasyd,

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)

For services to New South Wales Heritage

	Barnstar of National Merit
	You have rolled out many hundreds of articles and taken many photos to illustrate them! Thank you! Kerry (talk) 07:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

145-151 George Street, the Rocks

There are 3 Wikipedia pages covering these street numbers 149-151 George Street, The Rocks. You have added your image to 147 and 149-151 but not to 145. Since I was in the city I thought that I would take a photo of 145. However, I now see that your photo seems to cover 145, and in fact has the same properties as are covered in the old photo on 145. So I have added your photo to 145. I believe that 145 is the property on the corner, then 147-149 is in the centre and 151 on the left. These numbers are also shown on the awning in the old photo. You show in your caption for your photo on 147 that "147 George Street is located at right, pictured in 2019." I believe that 147 is to the right of 145, which is on the corner. You might also want to look at your caption for 149-151. I am not making an issue of this, but just suggesting that you to take another look at it. I might have confused myself with it all. By the way, I notice that you are doing some great things with this heritage stuff. I myself decided to take some heritage photos when I saw the banner at Wikipedia asking for people to take photos of heritage buildings, etc. Collywolly (talk) 10:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

It also seems that the images on the New York Hotel page are incorrect. 155 George Street is the "Fendi" building as indicated by Fendi at https://www.whitepages.com.au/fendi-australia-pty-ltd-10558559/The-Rocks-NSW-10561645B. I will be going into Sydney soon and will take a photo of 155 George Street. Collywolly (talk) 26 March 2019

@Collywolly: Thanks. Please do not edit my page in the way that you did. Add another comment below and time/date stamp it (in the format as I have done). If the images in your opinion at New York Hotel (or elsewhere) are incorrect, well, correct them. I don't own them. Just do it! Refer WP:BRAVE. If someone thinks your edits are incorrect, they will revert them or let you know by creating discussion on a talk page. Finally, give consideration as to whether the discussion should happen on a User's talk page or the article talk page. In other words, should this discussion happen on my page, or at Talk:New York Hotel. Happy editing :-) Rangasyd (talk) 12:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I edited your page. You hadn't replied so I thought that I would add another paragraph. I was just intending to be polite, in letting you know about the captions. If you want to correct them you can do so. Collywolly (talk) 20:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Collywolly: That's cool. I didn't reply because I "corrected" the articles, based on your above feedback. I have not done anything with the New York Hotel. I'll leave that to you to be WP:BRAVE and "correct" the article. Rangasyd (talk) 06:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

NSW government changes

I have noticed that you have updated the wikis of abolished and new NSW agencies and departments. The problem is, legally, the abolition does not occur until 1 July 2019. See:

• Legislation relating to the changes
• UrbanGrowth website

So for now, I suggest we stop updating dates to 2 April. If possible, we should change the dates from 2 April to 1 July for abolition and establishment dates. Since the changes on wiki are extensive and have been done, I reckon we should keep the tense (past tense for the soon-to-be abolished agencies and present tense for future agencies), otherwise it will be extremely troublesome. Marcnut1996 (talk) 07:30, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey. Thanks for that. The devil is in the detail. I've stopped work for the time being. Excluding the ministerial appointments, which were significant, the only major changes are/were:

• Department of Justice and Department of Family and Community Services → Department of Family and Community Services and Justice
• Department of Planning and Environment and Department of Industry and Office of Local Government → Department of Planning and Industry
• Department of Finance, Services and Innovation → Department of Customer Service
• Office of Environment and Heritage → Department of Premier and Cabinet
• UrbanGrowth NSW → Infrastructure NSW

I've updated all the above articles to reflect the date of 1 July 2019. I've tried to keep the tense neutral. Thanks again. Cheers. Rangasyd (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

residual item

fyi - lies in an unassessed category or two https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rangasyd/sandbox/Template:Rivers_of_the_Murray%E2%80%93Darling_basin JarrahTree 08:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed and redirect now in place. Cheers. Rangasyd (talk) 09:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

NP too easily done JarrahTree 09:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Image Categories and descriptions

Hi, Thanks for info re categorising and describing images. I will start by revisitng all of the categories that I have created while adding heritage photos and add more relevant categories. I will also change the category, where I have included it as "New South Wales State Heritage Register" to one of the sub categories which reflects the locality that the property is in. Thanks for your help. Collywolly (talk) 02:23, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Rangasyd,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

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.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

just checking

sorry to bother https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guildford_Grammar_School is a combined primary and secondary anglican school - maybe you havent got to secondary (as opposed to high) yet in your thorough checking everything (very good work there) -just when i saw removal of high - thought I'd drop a note - keep up the hard work, !! JarrahTree 14:11, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: No bother. You caught me 'work in progress'. Thanks. How does it read now? I think it's much clearer. Interested in helping with more schools in WA? Rangasyd (talk) 14:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

thanks for that - good! yup, to the question... JarrahTree 14:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Well, I'm working on a project to make all Australian school articles consistent. In WA, what I'm doing is moving all the schools that are listed Category:High schools in Western Australia to Category:Public high schools in Western Australia. At the same time I'm making the infobox and the lede consistent. In the infobox I'm adding a Perth/WA map, plus a street map, making sure the coordinates are consistent, diffusing categories, removing overlinking, tidying up the alumni section, and having a consistent table format for school principals (where listed). If you visit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Public_high_schools_in_Western_Australia you can see examples of various articles completed. View the history of some of these articles and you can get an idea of the changes that I've made. I'm currently working on schools starting with 'G'; but I'm about to go to bed for the night. You can start on the 'C's if you're interested...? Cheers Rangasyd (talk) 15:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

challenged for brain space, time and a few other things in the short term - there is a local who may be interested... JarrahTree 09:54, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

I hear ya. Sure.. connect the dots, if they want to help. Then I can go back to NSW schools and finish them off. Got distracted. Rangasyd (talk) 09:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

St Paul's Anglican Grammar School - coord display

This edit appears to introduce a error in the {{coord}} (look at how it displays in the title) but it's not immediately obvious to me how to fix it. Mitch Ames (talk) 10:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@Mitch Ames: Thanks. Fixed. Happy editing. 10:05, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

sfunny

In syd at this moment, keep seeing buildings in cbd that look like candidates for articles even if they arent heritage, but hell.. so little time... JarrahTree 13:53, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

They're probably on the City of Sydney local government heritage register; that are yet to make it to the New South Wales State Heritage Register. New listings have been tightened and it is now much harder for a building to place on the NSWSHR. Rangasyd (talk) 14:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

having lived here very very long ago, the thing in some cases maybe its not so much heritage as simply idiosyncratic to sydney, that would be hard for heritage lists documenter researchers methinks - anyways the onslaught of food outlets in the cbd is bizarre almost every commercial property in about three long streetscapes I traversed was food at street level. When I lived here nothing like that at all. JarrahTree 22:00, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Rangasyd,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

---

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) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox high court

Template:Infobox high court has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox court. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Colin M (talk) 17:25, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

School descriptions

Hi, just letting you know that I've restored the table of descriptions that I suggested. I certainly have no problem with you publishing your own suggestions. Cheers. Onetwothreeip (talk) 11:04, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: No hassles. Would you please treat me with five examples of independent private schools; that are not independent schools? And another five examples of state public schools; that are not public schools. Thanks :-) Rangasyd (talk) 10:45, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Independent schools are private schools, while public and state are interchangeable terms. Onetwothreeip (talk) 11:55, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I think you've missed my point; or you've actually realised my point... not too sure which. What are independent private schools? What are state public schools? Surely, the first are independent schools (and you can't have both independent AND private, as proposed by you); and the second are state/public schools (interchangeable, but you can't use both). Agree? Rangasyd (talk) 12:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Independent schools are a subsection of private schools, generally those which are not Catholic. "State public" schools are schools controlled by the state governments. The most common way to describe these schools is "public", but that could also mean a certain type of private school, so "state public" removes that ambiguity. Schools aren't "independent private", but they may both be independent and private. It is necessary to call them private, and independent is simply the type of private that they are. Onetwothreeip (talk) 00:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Onetwothreeip: "Independent schools are a subsection of private schools." Would you please provide a substantive reference to this statement? Would you please provide five examples (names of schools) that are, in your view, "independent and private"? Based on your definition above, these schools must not be just independent. Many thanks Rangasyd (talk) 14:21, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources like this show such distinctions made between public, Catholic and independent schools. A typical example of an independent private school would be Wesley College. Onetwothreeip (talk) 09:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: Thanks for the reply. I can't see anywhere in that article that provides substantiation to your claim that "Independent schools are a subsection of private schools." In fact, it uses the terms private and independent interchangeably to refer to schools that are not government/public/state schools. This is exactly my point. They are one and the same thing – not a sub-set of the other. As to Wesley College, as far as I can see from reviewing the outdated Wikipedia article, reviewing the school's website, reviewing the school's 2018 annual report, and reviewing the MySchools website, Wesley College is an independent school; also sometimes called a private school. It is not an independent and private school. If you feel that I'm wrong, please point me to the exact page/para/line where I've made a huge mistake and overlooked what is blatantly obvious. Many thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 10:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

"Independent" is often used to allude to private schools generally, but more specifically they exclude Catholic schools. The first instance of "independent" then explains it excludes Catholic schools, and this is an article by an education researcher. Yes, Wesley College is an independent school and a private school, as you can clearly tell from the article, website and elsewhere. I don't see what you are disagreeing with here. Onetwothreeip (talk) 11:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: Thanks again. Wesley College is an independent or private school. Wesley College is not an independent and private school. Conjunction (grammar)#Coordinating conjunctions refers. The Conversation article opines that "...enrolment in public and independent primary schools has increased...." [excluding Catholic primary schools (where enrolments are unknown??)]: my interpretation of the sentence in para 6. The article does not exclude Catholic schools from any definition. It is simply stating that that enrolments have increased in public and independent primary schools. Is there somewhere else in the article that I'm missing? Rangasyd (talk) 11:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

How can it be either but not both? What does this even mean? Is it an independent school: yes. Is it a private school: yes. Onetwothreeip (talk) 10:08, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: OK. Let's put it another way. "Independent" and "private" are synonyms; that is they mean the same thing. You wouldn't say that when I watch television I like to sit on a "settee" and "sofa"; you would say that when I watch television I like to sit on a "settee" or "sofa". Hence, you would only use one description, not both. "My children are educated at an independent school;" or "My children are educated at a private school;" not "My children are educated at an independent and private school." Does that make sense? Rangasyd (talk) 10:38, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

They don't mean the same thing but one is a subset of the other generally. It would certainly be correct for somebody to say that their child is enrolled in a private and independent school. It's not as if they are saying the child is enrolled in a private school and an independent school. It seems like you're trying to make a very convoluted point for no clear reason. Are you trying to change the subject? Onetwothreeip (talk) 11:07, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

@Onetwothreeip: Are you trying to change the subject?: No. I don't know how you got to that point...? It would certainly be correct for somebody to say that their child is enrolled in a private school. It would certainly be correct for somebody to say that their child is enrolled in an independent school. Despite working in the sector for many years, I've never heard someone say that their child is enrolled in a private and independent school. I've provided references here and elsewhere to support my opinion. I've asked you several times to provide evidence of your unsubstantiated claim that one is a subset of the other. You seem to be ignoring this request or the one reference provided in no way supported your claim. It seems like you're trying to make a very convoluted point for no clear reason. My purpose is very clear. To reach consensus on how non-government and government schools are described. That was very clearly stated from the outset and has not changed. You seem to be stuck on describing non-government schools as concurrently both independent and private. Most other editors seem to have reached the consensus that non-government schools (with the exception of Catholic systemic schools) can be described as "independent"; and that "private" was a term used many years ago, yet is no longer current. Please note that none of the above is said in malice and I value your input into the debate and discussion. I am also aware of comments on your talk page and am simply providing you with ample opportunity to back your claims. I really want you to do so. Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 11:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

It would be unnecessary for someone to say their child was in a "private independent" school, just as it would be unnecessary for them to use any lead sentence to describe their child's education. We don't write lead sentences, or any part of the article, in order to be repeated as part of casual conversation. We write to make content as encyclopaedic as possible, giving readers information. You seem to be stuck on describing non-government schools as concurrently both independent and private. On the contrary, Catholic schools are private and not independent, while non-Catholic private schools are independent (and private). It seems like you're pleading that there are a few Catholic schools which are not part of what you are considering to be the mainstream Catholic system, and I have no problem with describing that as such. I don't think what I'm saying is at all controversial but I can get sources for you if you wish. Onetwothreeip (talk) 09:18, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Please provide sources that define a "private school"; and please provide sources that define an "independent school". And then perhaps we can move forward. Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 10:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

I thought that you may find this of interest:

Schools in Australia may be classified as either government or non-government schools. Government schools are the direct responsibility of the Director-General of Education (or equivalent) in each state or territory and receive funding from the relevant state or territory government. Non-government schools can be further classified, based on self-identification of the school’s affiliation. Non-government schools are grouped for reporting as Catholic (including Catholic affiliated independent schools) or independent (other non-government schools, including Anglican). Non-government schools operate under conditions determined by state and territory government regulatory authorities and receive funding from the Australian Government and relevant state or territory government.

With thanks to the ABS. Rangasyd (talk) 12:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

That reflects the common delineation of private schools, where Catholic schools and independent schools are separate groups but both private schools. Non-government schools are grouped for reporting as Catholic (including Catholic affiliated independent schools) or independent (other non-government schools, including Anglican). Furthermore, "private schools" and "non-government schools" are interchangeable terms, but "government school" is a very uncommon term for what is more often known as a public school, or somewhat often as a state school. Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:57, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree that the more common term locally is "state school" or "public school" depending which state you are in, but is there any misunderstanding likely to be created by the term "government school" to either Australians or those further afield? Does it convey the notion of being under the control of the government (being likely to be open to all, with similar standards and expectations etc), as opposed to being a school possibly not open to all students, or one that operates under different principles (e.g. religious, pedagogical e.g. Steiner). I think as long as nobody is likely to misunderstand the term, then I think it works better than terms that might have other meanings and or might be seen as favouring the terminology of one parts of Australia over another (which is often an area of sensitivity). The other pragmatic consideration (frequently overlooked) is volunteer enthusiasm. If we make writing about Australian schools too complex or too contentious, then editors will stop writing about schools. Many of our attempts to achieve consensus on many Australian topics burn out or fade away because people refuse to grasp that a consensus (by defintion) is what works for most people. It is often impossible to find a consensus that works for all people. Kerry (talk) 00:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Rosedale Cottage

Please see recent two tags for clarification. Help? --LilHelpa (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. The source had some errors in it. Corrected and tags removed. Cheers. Rangasyd (talk) 20:24, 25 August 2019 (UTC) Rangasyd (talk) 20:24, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Rangasyd/Archive 10,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikipedia and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 16:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Rangasyd,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 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.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion

• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
• Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

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, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Rangasyd/Archive 10,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 15:39, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Rangasyd/Archive 10,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Arbitrary NSW HD entries

I can sort-of produce Wikipedia articles from these. See User:Kerry Raymond/sandbox for St Johns at Wollombi (note it looks scrappy because the NSW HD entry is scrappy). The tool I built was for the purpose of generating additional text for NSW SHR entries that were minimal but there was better content for that site in one of the other NSW HD entries. That is, the goal was to produce history, description and significance content rather than infoboxes, categories etc. Having said that, I think the main thing my tool does not do is state which heritage register it is coming from (in this case it is the Hunter Heritage Regional Environmental Plan -- whatever that is) as that wasn't needed for the NSW SHR purpose. I probably could extract the name of the heritage register from the NSW HD if needed. I assume my photo extracting tool would work too again with a little tweaking (noting I have yet to extract and upload about half the photos from the NSW SHR which is probably more of a priority for me). The main question is whether the arbitrary NSW HD entries are notable under WP:GNG. If they are, then tell me the database ID (which appears in the NSW HD URL) and I can email you the draft article. Kerry (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond: Thanks for that. Initially I thought we'd missed one from the NSW SHR. Then I realised it was from the NSW HD. I've created the article at St John the Evangelist Church, Wollombi using what was in your sandbox as the base. Thanks so much. I'm working through Edmund Blacket's buildings. I think I will move them out of his article and into a operate list. As I was going through the articles I realised that quite a few did not have Wikipedia articles... it was only on closer inspection that I rebased that they were not in the NSHSHR. So thanks; but no need for more at present. I'll let you know if more are required. By the way, I used {{Infobox church}} instead of {{Infobox historic site}}. I can't recall if a code was ever created for NSW HD. Can you... and what is the page where you request a code be created? My memory is fading!! Rangasyd (talk) 15:49, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Template talk:Designation is the place to request new codes/colour schemes set up. Kerry (talk) 20:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Well well well, take a look at [1] Kerry (talk) 21:55, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Also I agree with you that the colours should be different to NSW SHR. Kerry (talk) 21:57, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

This would be great to do for the country railway stations especially, nearly all of which had NSWSHR articles which were balls and great content elsewhere in the NSWHD. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:50, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: Well, if you just want content for NSW SHR articles, I can do that now. With more work on the code, I can possibly do a bit better in terms of producing stand-alone articles for things not in the NSW SHR but you feel can pass GNG. Now that the NSW HD is a designation for infobox historic site, I can produce a proper infobox for the articles, although it's a bit of a cheat as we probably should also say the precise register it is on. I am thinking along the lines of a lede that says "It was added to the Hunter Heritage Regional Environmental Plan on 18 October 2019". That would be honest about the heritage listing but not require us to have designations or individual articles about all these little heritage registers (I guess we could do redirects for them and let the New South Wales Heritage Database article explain the exciting variety of HRs it contains). Kerry (talk) 03:31, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: As you might recall that in my NSW SHR project spreadsheet, there is that field called "issues" that the two of you occasionally filled in noting the lack of content in a NSW SHR article. I can easily give you that list of articles as sites you might like to investigate in the NSW HD for better content in one of the other registers. If you find something useful, send me the database ID and I'll send you the generated material. Of course if you are both interested in doing it, we probably need to divide the set by LGA (as we did before) or something else so you don't waste time working on the same thing. While not every article needing additional content may have been flagged in the spreadsheet, there are 121 currently so flagged so they would be a good place to start. Kerry (talk) 03:42, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond: I'm happy to make a start on the "issues". So, if we use St John the Evangelist Church, Wollombi as the example for applying the NSW HD template, I suggest that in the infobox we use {{designation1_free4name = Listing Title}} and, hence, {{designation1_free4value = Hunter Heritage Regional Environmental Plan, 1989}}. In the lede/body of the article we simply stick to "... added to the New South Wales Heritage Database on 18 October 2019". Or Kerry, do you think we should proceed as you've proposed above? Should this discussion be moved to another page? Rangasyd (talk) 10:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

You are right we should probably be talking on another page. I think your proposal is OK for me though. Kerry (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Comment on this page has concluded. Please refer all future discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian historic places#New South Wales Heritage database. With thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 11:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello Rangasyd,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 815 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

Tools

• It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
• It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.

Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

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, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
• Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.

Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Camden and St John's

Hi, I am the person who nominated the St Johns Anglican Church Precinct for the NSW SHR and the Australian National Heritage List. As part of the project I added the Heritage Section to the Camden Wiki page. (I am also a member of the Camden Historical Society which has just created a working group to promote the nomination of some part of the Macarthur Legacy for inclusion on the Australian National Heritage List.) I have undone your last set of changes to the Camden wiki page to reflect the content of the SHR and local knowledge. I think it important to acknowledge Camden Park House & Gardens are no longer attached to Camden Park Estate and Belegenny Farm. They are physically separate, have different owners and are operated separately. This is reflected by their individual listings in the SHR. Also, I think it is important to understand the St Johns Anglican Church Precinct and the St John's the Evangelist Church building are not the same thing. Precinct is remnant of the original Macarthur gifts. The Church is only one small part of the Precinct. I had started on a wiki page for the St Johns Anglican Church Precinct, but you have beaten me to it, good work! The problem I found is the Heritage Conservation Management Plan contains many errors and omissions. I corrected the pertinent ones in the documents accompanying my SHR nomination. Over the next little would like to add corrections (with references) to your wiki page. Do you want to work with me on this or is it ok for me to modify the page? There is a great deal of local community interest the precinct at present. The local church is planning to sell over 60% of the precinct for development (aged care facility), this plan is not popular with the community. Fletcher User:Fj42 21:24, 18 November 2019‎.

Discussion on this topic has been moved to Talk:St John's Anglican Church, Camden#State heritage listing.

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)