User talk:Citrivescence/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Citrivescence. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Thank you!
Hi and thank you for the great work on The Mothers. I noticed you don’t have the autopatrol flag yet but from a quick look over some entries you’ve created, I think you would definitely qualify. If that sounds good, I can put you up (I’ve nominated a few dozen people all successfully IIRC) or you can make the request yourself. Always great when we can reduce the stream of reviews needed by NPR. Thanks again for so much great work—looking at your created pages was very impressive! Innisfree987 (talk) 18:31, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Innisfree987: Thank you so much for the kind words. I've been editing for about two years and I've been working hard to write strong articles. I would definitely appreciate you putting me up to autopatrol. Thanks for offering! --Citrivescence (talk) 19:49, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- The effort and care you’re putting in definitely shine through! I’ll make the nom right now. WP is lucky to have you! Innisfree987 (talk) 20:21, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Innisfree987: Thanks so much! That means a lot. --Citrivescence (talk) 02:28, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- The effort and care you’re putting in definitely shine through! I’ll make the nom right now. WP is lucky to have you! Innisfree987 (talk) 20:21, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Citrivescence, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 21:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: Great, thank you so much. I also saw your note about the em dash and will be sure to attend to that in the future. --Citrivescence (talk) 02:29, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- My pleasure. Note it's about dashes in general; endashes are much more frequently used than emdashes :-) Schwede66 02:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: You're right and that's definitely true in my case. Duly noted :) -Citrivescence (talk) 04:35, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- My pleasure. Note it's about dashes in general; endashes are much more frequently used than emdashes :-) Schwede66 02:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Image without license
Unspecified source/license for File:Keisha Zollar.png
Thanks for uploading File:Keisha Zollar.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 05:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
December with Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello Citrivescence,
- Year in review
It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
| Rank | Username | Num reviews | Log |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DannyS712 bot III (talk) | 67,552 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 2 | Rosguill (talk) | 63,821 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 3 | John B123 (talk) | 21,697 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 4 | Onel5969 (talk) | 19,879 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 5 | JTtheOG (talk) | 12,901 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 6 | Mcampany (talk) | 9,103 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 7 | DragonflySixtyseven (talk) | 6,401 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 8 | Mccapra (talk) | 4,918 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 9 | Hughesdarren (talk) | 4,520 | Patrol Page Curation |
| 10 | Utopes (talk) | 3,958 | Patrol Page Curation |
- Reviewer of the Year
John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
- NPP Technical Achievement Award
As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Your help desk question
Did you get the answer you needed to this question, which I just now saw?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Vchimpanzee: I did not get an answer! I'm interested in any insights or advice you have. –Citrivescence (talk) 22:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- I actually don't know anything about answering most of the questions on the Help Desk. There may be some good information even in a draft that is declined. That's all I would know to do.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:51, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Vchimpanzee: Oh okay, well I appreciate the information, thank you.–Citrivescence (talk) 22:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- I actually don't know anything about answering most of the questions on the Help Desk. There may be some good information even in a draft that is declined. That's all I would know to do.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:51, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Blaire Erskine
Just dropping by to let you know I nominated Blaire Erskine for a Did You Know spot and gave you credit as creator. Trillfendi (talk) 22:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Trillfendi: Great, thank you!– Citrivescence (talk) 03:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
A New Year With Women in Red!
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
February 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Orphaned non-free image File:For Harriet website logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:For Harriet website logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, by President Hunter Franklin
as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:32, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 18
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Steven Crowder
- added a link pointing to Lauren Williams
- Vox Media
- added a link pointing to Lauren Williams
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
March 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
DYK for Blaire Erskine
On 16 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Blaire Erskine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that comedian Blaire Erskine's mock interview duped Michael Moore into believing she was a Donald Trump supporter stranded and freezing after his Omaha, Nebraska, rally? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Blaire Erskine. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Blaire Erskine), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
April editathons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
.jpg){kind=logo}
The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.
We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.
More information, and registration details, at QW2021.--Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group 02:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
May 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Patti Harrison
what are you talking about, i left a super detailed edit summary explaining that the portion of the sentence i removed was not supported by the source. no where in the source does it say she dealt with internalized transphobia by making jokes about sexuality. it says she felt worried about making jokes about her sexuality DUE to her internalized transphobia. that's a big difference. did you even read the source? --parqs (talk) 18:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- you were the editor who was first disrespectful, presumptive, and patronizing towards me while being in the incorrect position due to your overzealous and superficial approach to policing an article. all i did was ask you if you read the source. is being asked such a basic question offensive to you? please, no longer speak to me. --parqs (talk) 03:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
- your lack of introspection and ability to condescend truly is remarkable. it's a shame those such as yourself contribute to the reputation of wikipedia editors. --parqs (talk) 07:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
June 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Small comment
When wikilinking, italics go outside (ex. ''[[The New York Times]]'' instead of [[The New York Times|''The New York Times'']]). Also see WP:NOTBROKEN when adding links with a different name (ex. ''[[Vulture (website)|Vulture]]'' instead of [[New York (magazine)|Vulture (website)]]). Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Some Dude From North Carolina: Okay, I appreciate the notice. –Citrivescence (talk) 04:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Folkmoot USA
So I check this article every now and then and found these words missing: "The Folkmoot USA non-profit organization has its headquarters in the former Hazelwood Elementary School. The name 'Folkmoot', used for a festival in Newcastle upon Tyne, England, means "meeting of the people".
These facts look important to me. Why did you remove them?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:44, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Vchimpanzee: I don't have any memory of making that edit. Was it recently? I'm a new page reviewer so my best guess is that, if I reviewed it, that statement was either uncited or flagged as a copyright violation. However, I can't be sure.--Citrivescence (talk) 03:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- It was sourced and it was not likely a copyright violation. Your edit summary mentioned removing promotional language but I think identifying the headquarters building for the organization in charge is reasonable. And the name needs to be explained, although there is another section about other meanings of the name. Both of these facts seemed important enough for the lede. I'll put them back if no one objects.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- I did find one possible problem. I wasn't aware of the need for independent sources back when I created the article. But I moved one sentence so that an independent source does refer to that sentence.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Vchimpanzee: Then it was likely a mistake on my part. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. --Citrivescence (talk) 01:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- I made some further improvements with the sources. It looks like your other edits were improvements.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Vchimpanzee: Then it was likely a mistake on my part. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. --Citrivescence (talk) 01:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- I did find one possible problem. I wasn't aware of the need for independent sources back when I created the article. But I moved one sentence so that an independent source does refer to that sentence.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- It was sourced and it was not likely a copyright violation. Your edit summary mentioned removing promotional language but I think identifying the headquarters building for the organization in charge is reasonable. And the name needs to be explained, although there is another section about other meanings of the name. Both of these facts seemed important enough for the lede. I'll put them back if no one objects.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Vchimpanzee: I don't have any memory of making that edit. Was it recently? I'm a new page reviewer so my best guess is that, if I reviewed it, that statement was either uncited or flagged as a copyright violation. However, I can't be sure.--Citrivescence (talk) 03:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Betty HBO poster.png
Thanks for uploading File:Betty HBO poster.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:04, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:On the Record film.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:On the Record film.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
July 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
August Editathons at Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021
Hello Citrivescence,
Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.
Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.
At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.
There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.
Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
October 2021 at Women in Red
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
November 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
November 2021 backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
December 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
January 2022 Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
February with Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:09, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
February 2022
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Pineapple Street Studios. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. 2pou (talk) 23:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
March editathons
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
April Editathons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
May Women in Red events
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello Citrivescence,
At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.
Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.
In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 805 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 848 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.
This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
June events from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello Citrivescence,
- Backlog status
At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.
Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]
In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).
While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).
- Backlog drive
A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. 
Barnstars will be awarded.
- TIP – New school articles
Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
- Misc
There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 13962 articles, as of 20:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot
There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.
- Reminders
- Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
- If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing
{{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page. - If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
- To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
- Notes