Open main menu


Sorry for the late reply. Feel free to reuse that title for Wikipedia: Notability (numbers), or a redirect to it. Cheers. Michael Z. 2007-10-08 20:49 Z

Help Project newsletter : Issue 4Edit

The Help Project Newsletter
Issue IV - September 2012
Project news summary

From the editor

Hi, and welcome to the fourth issue of the Help Project newsletter.

It's been another busy month in the world of Wikipedia help. The results from the in-person usability tests conducted as part of the help pages fellowship have been released. There are no great surprises here, the tests confirmed that people have trouble with the existing help system, and people looking for help on the same topic often end up at wildly different pages. Editors who experienced a tutorial and/or edited a sandbox as part of their learning were noticeably more confident when editing a real article.

Drawing on that, three new "Introduction to" tutorials for new users have been created: referencing, uploading images and navigating Wikipedia. These join the popular existing introductions to policies and guidelines and talk pages. Feel free to edit them, but please do remember that the idea is to keep them simple and as free from extraneous details as possible. All three have been added to Help:Getting started, which is intended to be the new focal point for new editors, and will also be seeing a redesign soon.

In other news, the Article Feedback Tool (AFT) can now be used to collect feedback on help pages. By default it has been deployed to all pages in the Help: namespace. It can be disabled on any page by adding Category:Article Feedback Blacklist, or enabled for pages in other namespaces by adding Category:Article Feedback 5 Additional Articles. Once a page has AFT applied, you can add feedback using the form which appears at the bottom of it. Feedback can be reviewed by clicking "View feedback" in the sidebar, or the "Feedback from my watched pages" link at the top of your watchlist.

I'm now entering the final month of my fellowship, and will be focusing my efforts on making much needed improvements to Help:Contents, the main entrance point to our help system. It's been a pleasure working as a fellow, and I just want to thank all the people who have helped me or offered advice over the past months. That definitely won't be the end of my involvement in the Help Project though, I'll be sticking around as a volunteer and continuing to write this newsletter.

Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter. If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.

-- the wub "?!" 20:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


Hello, SmokeyJoe. You have new messages at BrownHairedGirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Help Project newsletter : Issue 5Edit

The Help Project Newsletter
Issue V - January 2013
Project news summary
From the editor

Hello again from the Help Project!

In the last newsletter (which was quite a while ago sorry!) I talked about my fellowship and the plans for improving the main portal page, Help:Contents. Well I'm sad to say that my fellowship is now over, but very happy to say that the proposed improvements to that page have been completed and implemented. Do check it out if you haven't already.

Another important and frequently used help page, Wikipedia:Contact us, has also seen a significant revamp. You may recognise the design inspiration from the new tutorial pages.

In project news, we now have a subscription to the "article alerts" service. Any deletion nominations, move discussions, or requests for comments on pages within the Help Project's scope will now show up at Wikipedia:Help Project/Article alerts. So that's definitely a page which project members might want to watch.

Any comments or suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter. If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.

-- the wub "?!" 23:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject:REHAB updateEdit

You signed up for WikiProject User Rehab

Hi there, I'm RDN1F. It's come to my attention that you've signed up for WikiProject Rehab, but since that time the project has retired. I've decided to take it upon myself to rejuvenate the project - but I could do with your help. If you are still willing to help mentor (or even give me a hand in bringing this project back!) leave a message on my talk page
RDN1F TALK 16:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Help Project newsletter : Issue 6Edit

The Help Project Newsletter

Issue VI - April 2013

Open Help Conference

The Open Help Conference will be taking place June 15-19 in Cincinnati Ohio, USA. The conference includes two days of presentations and open discussions, followed by team "sprints" - collaborative efforts to write and improve documentation.

It has been suggested to send a team from Wikipedia/Wikimedia: to share our own knowledge about help, learn from others in the open source community working on similar problems, and to carry out a sprint to improve some aspect of Wikipedia's help.

There may be support available for volunteers to attend from the Participation Support program (and your editor is certainly hoping to be there!) Please join the discussion in Meta's IdeaLab if you're interested, and/or have suggestions about what we could work on.

Other news

If you don't wish to receive this newsletter on your talk page in future then just edit the participants page and add "no newsletter" next to your name.

Suggestions for future issues are welcome at Wikipedia:Help Project/Newsletter.

the wub "?!" 16:22, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Check this out: Wikipedia talk:Wikimedia Strategy 2017#Wikimedia data is at the heart of AI research, but the Wikimedia community is notEdit

September 11 PortalEdit

You wrote: "Portals don't work as intended. Archiving instead would have been better." What are you saying should have been done with archiving? If you mean that the portal should be archived, then perhaps you can say that in the MFD, or explain how to archive a portal. I agree that portals don't work as intended, for reasons that I have explained at length and that you have stated more briefly, but do you mean that archiving is an alternative to deletion, or an alternative to portals, or what? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:35, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

  • I am not happy that so much history of good faith work is being deleted. Old things that are no longer wanted should be archived. It’s a pity that my suggestion for mass archiving of Portals was not agreed to, and the community has had to resort to deletion to make their decision clear and enforced. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:18, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019Edit

Hello SmokeyJoe,

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.


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.


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.


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)

Primary topics and disambiguationEdit

SmokeyJoe, I thought I'd take this offline, because I genuinely want to understand how you view the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC guideline. When there is an ambiguous term such as Batman, are you fundamentally opposed to that link going directly to the Batman comic book character article? Is it your preference that it should instead direct to Batman (disambiguation)? Your disgust with hatnotes seems to indicate that this would in fact be your preference. It would also go a long way in explaining your position, because if you support the primary topic guideline, then I'm not sure how you can be opposed to hatnotes in general, since they're a crucial part of that concept. --GoneIn60 (talk) 07:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

AfD Draft:Jane OgbuigweEdit

Your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Jane Ogbuigwe were appropriate. Apologies, lack of sleep too generous a slug of warming spirits and the last edit of the day tends to subdue the critical faculties. The comment was neither required nor justified. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   09:58, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Edit glitchEdit

This seems to be a glitch. I get them from time to time too. Andrewa (talk) 06:24, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I removed it. Please feel encouraged to fix my glitches and other small mistakes. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:35, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Civility Barnstar
You're awesome, and I love the way that you are willing not only to search for additional information and let it change your mind, but also to say so in public. I hope that more of us will have the courage to follow your example. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Reverting a relistEdit

I'm baffled by this edit of yours, where you reverted my relisting of an MfD, apparently because I didn't provide a comment to go along with the relisting? Relists don't require comments in most cases, they are self-explanatory. Care to explain? ‑Scottywong| [spout] || 02:29, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

  • MfD doesn’t require relisting as a routine action for generating new comments. It doesn’t even work. All you are doing is shuffling the MfD list and adding clutter to the conversation.
Old overdue included discussion are highlighted as such in a few placed. Your relist serves to remove the discussion from that group, making it look fresh, therefore your relist is actually counterproductive. If it is not ready to close, leave it, and it will attract attention simply for being old. Some people, including me, routinely work the tail end of aged XfDs.
On the other hand, if as a potential closer you have a useful comment, such as an attempt to refocus discussion, or to draw attention of early participants to a later comment, then that is a very good reason to relist, with a relisting comment.
Thanks for closing MfD discussions though. We don’t see very many different people participating there.
SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:59, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Roy Johnston (artist)Edit


Hello, SmokeyJoe. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Roy Johnston".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CASSIOPEIA(talk) 02:01, 2 September 2019 (UTC)


Hi Joe, please let me insist on separating HOT from OSM. The two things are different, and Wikipedia associating HOT straight into OSM is a cause of confusion for OSM contributors. I am aware that the page was just a stub, the way I had put it, but it was a meaningful stub. The Humanitarian Openstreetmap Team USA Inc. does not represent all the Humanitarian mapping being done on and with Openstreetmap, it an organization by its own, and I think it does deserve its own page, and from there, link to OSM, but not redirect. You see that you removed the information I had put into the new page, since it obviously does not have a place in the OSM page. Mfrasca (talk) 12:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mfrasca. If I’m guessing correctly what you are talking about, your page had zero independent sources that commented on the topic, and I redirected to the sole page to which your page had any relevance.
It is an organization of its own? Have you read WP:ORG? Wikipedia is not particularly amenable to organizations having their own pages in the absence of secondary sources covering them. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:47, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi. I've checked the Dutch, Italian, and Spanish versions of the page WP:ORG and in my opinion the HOT does match the criteria. I get lost in the English version, I'm sorry. We need secondary sources, talking about HOT? Is that what we miss? Maybe the point is precisely this: HOT Inc. does their best to get confused with OSM, their name "HOT" makes text searches very difficult, where most matches are false positives. Do the following sources qualify as secondary source?
Mfrasca (talk) 15:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi again. HOT is a USA company, while OSM is a UK company. Also not sufficient for keeping them apart? Mfrasca (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:44, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
check for comparison Missing Maps. Mfrasca (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:56, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019Edit

Hello SmokeyJoe,


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.


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.

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)

Return to the user page of "SmokeyJoe".