Jump to content

User talk:Joe Roe/Archives/2023

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hello Joe,

Please visit my article and give me review what I have missed and what need to improve. thanks Muhammad Sadik Hasan (talk) 02:40, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 January 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

NPP Award for 2022

The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award

For over 1,000 article reviews during 2022. Well done! Keep up the good work! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - January 2023

Delivered January 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patroller

Good morning/afternoon! You granted me NPP access in October. My access is set to expire shortly, this month. Can you please extend my privileges (or grant it indefinite so I don't have to keep bothering you to extend it)? You can see my contributions here. Thanks! It's me... Sallicio! 16:18, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sallicio:  Done, sorry for the late response. – Joe (talk) 08:22, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
No worries; thanks! It's me... Sallicio! 13:18, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure now in effect

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.

In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period.

The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure now in effect

Women in Red in February 2023

Women in Red Feb 2023, Vol 9, Iss 2, Nos 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 259


Online events:

Tip of the month:

  • Explore Wikipedia for all variations of the woman's name (birth name,
    married name, re-married name, pen name, nickname)

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2023

Delivered February 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Joe Roe/Archives. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Email sent, re: editing restrictions issues an inappropriate edits

I'm writing here to notify you and give some visibility that I have noticed inappropriate edits by myself that need removal and I reached out to you as the admin who unblocked me. Please advise on how to continue on thread via email or here, however you think is best per your judgement. Sorry for the double notification: I'm just trying to make things right. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@Koavf: No worries. As requested, I've deleted the pages you listed at User:Koavf/delete. – Joe (talk) 15:08, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red March 2023

Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Mobile phone readers may only see the article "lead" – take some time to make it shine!
    Include something to keep people reading.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:53, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - March 2023

Delivered March 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation project to improve PageTriage

Hi, as an active New Page Patroller, I wanted to make sure you were aware of an upcoming Wikimedia Foundation project to improve the PageTriage extension. We recently published results of user interviews, and have some findings that we would value patrollers' opinions on. If you haven't yet, please consider adding the project page to your watchlist to stay up to date with our progress! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lamia Al-Gailani Werr

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lamia Al-Gailani Werr you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ingenuity -- Ingenuity (talk) 21:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

World War II and the history of Jews in Poland: Arbitration case opened

Hello Joe Roe,

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 04, 2023, which is when the first evidence phase closes. Submitted evidence will be summarized by Arbitrators and Clerks at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence/Summary. Owing to the summary style, editors are encouraged to submit evidence in small chunks sooner rather than more complete evidence later.

Details about the summary page, the two phases of evidence, a timeline and other answers to frequently asked questions can be found at the case's FAQ page.

For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

About that paragraph...

Hello, I see what you're suggesting about the paragraphs being short, but I feel I should point out it wasn't just length I was editing for. The paragraph begins discussing flora/fauna and ends discussing water. I split the paragraph because there are two topics in one paragraph. Creedweber (talk) 02:29, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Creedweber. I wrote all the text you're talking about, and I'm afraid I don't agree. It is already grouped by topic. – Joe (talk) 12:38, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
I just want to say how much I enjoy this particular page. I don't agree with you on this particular paragraph, but I admit I may be wrong in my considerations. Keep doing awesome work! Creedweber (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2023

Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:52, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - April 2023

Delivered April 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Lamia Al-Gailani Werr

The article Lamia Al-Gailani Werr you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lamia Al-Gailani Werr for comments about the article, and Talk:Lamia Al-Gailani Werr/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ingenuity -- Ingenuity (talk) 14:52, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

It's me again

Hello Joe, I have a question about stub articles. I'm directing this question to you because you have expanded many stub articles and all of your work it excellent. my question is how do you decide on what ways to expand a stub article? Do you have a template you work from or a basic outline? Or does the article itself dictate the direction the expansion takes? Creedweber (talk) 03:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Creedweber. Thank you. I think that very much depends on the topic. One type of article I work on a lot are biographies of academics, which have a fairly standard outline (see e.g. Jocelyn Orchard, Olena Tsvek, Tony Waldron). With other things you have to come up with the structure yourself based on the available sources. If you're trying to get started with writing articles, it's probably easier to stick to the more formulaic topics: biographies of people in certain occupations (e.g. academics, politicans, sportspeople), places, books and films, species, etc. – Joe (talk) 06:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Formatting

Hi Joe! I understand your point [1] (logically), but I keep encountering articles where the article layout is completely destroyed by people poorly using the "expanded" option (see [2]). Should we not just prevent such abuse by removing the option? The Template can be manually expanded on demand anyway, so all the information remain there, for anyone to see if interested... Best पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 06:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi पाटलिपुत्र. The point is that whether defaulting to expanded is a bad idea (or 'abuse' even) is very much subjective. I remember that we also disagreed with this on Template:Prehistoric Southwest Asia timeline, for example. I think that as a general rule, when good faith editors can disagree on which option is best, we should leave the decision to those involved in writing individual articles, rather than impose one option with a technical restriction. – Joe (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
In principle, yes. But just because an option is possible does not necessarily mean that's it's good to have the option. Imagine if I used an "expanded" option in my Template:Rulers of the Ancient Near East: using this option would be wrong every single time. I compacted "Template:History of China" some time ago, and it is better this way, despite some enthusiasts who invariably like to display the dazzling quantity of Chinese dynasties... I can hardly imagine a single "Paleolithic article" where there is so much text and so much space available, and so little illustration available, that a 51-lines expanded "Upper Paleolithic" template (yes, 51 lines... [3]) might be legitimate in terms of article layout. Better to leave such huge templates compacted, without any automatic option to leave them expanded: they still remain there with all the information, and can be manually expanded at will. No big issue, but it's annoying to keep encountering this layout mayhem, when we could simply remove the option and ensure normal, common-sense, usage... Ontologically, I don't quite see either why we should be imposed a full list of all Upper Paeleolithic cultures everytime we simply look up for a single one... apart for the die-hard Upper Paleolithic enthusiasts maybe ... पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 07:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

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

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

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red May 2023

Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Use the Google translate app and camera on your phone to translate text from an article or book

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - May 2023

Delivered May 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

20:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Request for a third-party opinion

There is a discussion ongoing at Talk:Neo-Confederates which you may be able to help with. Wes sideman (talk) 14:08, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 May 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

prehistory, level 2, see Rewards Board

Rewards Board. § Lingzhi (talk) 15:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Koavf

Hi.

Does this and this seem like the kind of behavior that should be expected from an editor who has recently been released from an indef block? As the admin who blocked and then unblocked him, perhaps a word might be in order?

Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Joe Roe, I just thought you might be interested to know that Koavf, who you blocked in 2020 for edit warring, has been edit warring again and has performed three reverts of the same edit in the past few days on Template:The Troggs. 2A00:20:B010:E430:D447:F465:F07C:3DF6 (talk) 16:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Personally I find it distasteful to follow a previously sanctioned editor around and look for ways to get them in trouble, but if you think this is becoming an issue again, please file a report at WP:ANEW or WP:ANI. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:20, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought I'd already responded to this. But yes, as Ivanvector says, you can use the usual dispute resolution processes if you think there's a problem with koavf's editing . I blocked and unblocked him for edit warring, that's it. I'm not going to start acting like his parole officer. – Joe (talk) 08:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
That said, is there any problem with my behavior? Is there something here that merits a block or something? What am I missing here? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:20, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red - June 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

DYK for Lamia Al-Gailani Werr

On 29 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lamia Al-Gailani Werr, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lamia Al-Gailani Werr helped rebuild the Iraq Museum after it was looted in the 2003 American-led invasion of Iraq? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lamia Al-Gailani Werr. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Lamia Al-Gailani Werr), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - June 2023

Delivered June 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

22:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

The Thief Collector

I believe it meets WP:DRAFTIFY. The article definitely has merit, was more than one hour since last edit, no copyvio. For crit #2, South by Southwest is not independent, and the other review aggregators aren't significant. Could you explain why it doesn't meet draftify? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:22, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Please explain to me which part of criteria #2 requires citations to non-independent and "significant" (whatever that means) sources. Because frankly, the message you left on the creator's talk page was complete nonsense. You told them it was moved to draftspace because it needs more citations from reliable, independent sources, but every single sentence outside of the lead and plot summary had an inline citation to a reliable source. You criticised the use of South by Southwest's website as a source for the fact that the film appeared at the South by Southwest festival, RottenTomatoes.com for its RottenTomatoes score, and Metacritic.com for its Metacritic score. If you were in Nebirish's shoes here, would you have the slightest idea what to do to satisfy you? – Joe (talk) 14:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Significant = significant coverage. RottenTomatoes and Metacritic are review aggregators. I don't consider that significant coverage, kind of like a repost on Yahoo News isn't significant coverage. It would be more obvious in terms of notability to cite individual reviews instead of a combined score. NFILM could also be pointed to. I believe there is a lack of GNG-passing sources in the article right now, thus meeting crit #2. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 18:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Putting aside the fact that this film is obviously notable (those aggregators list reviews in the LA Times, the Guardian, Variety, etc.), you'll note that notability concerns are not part of WP:DRAFTIFY. The notability guideline also explicitly states that notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article. – Joe (talk) 05:04, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Drafts

The draft was declined by an AFC reviewer as not sufficiently sourced to meet notability standards for films, but was then immediately moved into mainspace just one hour later by a random editor who is not an AFC reviewer with no further improvement and no resubmission for a second review. Editors simply aren't allowed to just waltz in and circumvent the AFC process like that. Bearcat (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bearcat: Erm, they are actually. AfC is optional. Also note the ongoing ANI thread about that reviewers poor reviews. – Joe (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello

Hey Joe. Thank you for supporting my RFA, even though I didn't answer your question perfectly. Just wanted you to know that I read your feedback, reflected on it, and I appreciate you sharing it with me. I hope we will get many chances to collaborate together positively in the future. Sincerely, –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:43, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

You beat me to posting on your talk page, congratulations on passing! Sorry that my comment seems to have fueled the (miniscule) oppose camp. It really was just meant as a general comment on the direction of RfA lately, not you specifically. I'm very happy you decided to run; it's been a while since we had a new admin from NPP and I think you'll do a great job. – Joe (talk) 07:21, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

What was wrong with it

I supplied reliable third person sources to show that Anna Margraf was notable. I don't understand why it was deleted. Dwanyewest (talk) 17:57, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Dwanyewest. The message you removed from your talk page explained why; have you read it? – Joe (talk) 04:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Hounding

This is really pushing the bounds of acceptable admin behavior. Further hounding may result in a report to AN. ~ Pbritti (talk) 06:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

You alluded to that SPI several times in our conversation about the drafts and in an AfD nom in which you pinged me; obviously I was going to look at it. Please try to calm down. – Joe (talk) 06:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Please stop hounding me—your comment was inappropriately placed and served to derail work. You need to backtrack. ~ Pbritti (talk) 07:00, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
@Pbritti you aren’t being hounded. Looking at the PA I mention on your talk page and this one, I’m considering blocking you when I get home. You aren’t fit for NPP either, so you should lose that. Doug Weller talk 09:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

"Peter Benjamin" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Peter Benjamin has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 26 § Peter Benjamin until a consensus is reached. ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 10:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Merge notice

I'm confused by this edit, which you've now done against the will of multiple editors. Its not just that its not necessary, but that it could be actively detrimental - we actively don't want people spending time on conducting a merge right now with it at DRV. There's also the fact that if you read its DRV discussions, its pretty likely be to overturned from its original merge close anyways. I don't understand the need here. Sergecross73 msg me 16:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: "Multiple" = two? And the first one because they misread the instructions and thought it was supposed to go on the talk page? Anyway, as I explained in my edit summary, I added {{deletion review}} to the page, which explicitly tells people to hold off on merging until the DRV is over. I understand that you're in favour of overturning the decision, but I think it's best to wait until a formal, uninvolved close before implementing that outcome. WP:BRD also applies here. – Joe (talk) 16:47, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
At the time of my revert, I was not aware that it had been contested before, I didn't bother to check the page history when removing an unnecessary tag like that. It was only in my shock of being reverted on such an edit that I checked the page history and saw I wasn't the only one who opposed its placement. Neither your edit summaries nor your explanation here help me understand why you'd think it would be good idea to have 2 concurrent templates that say "don't merge" and "please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion" atop the same article, but I don't wish to sink any more time into this. Sergecross73 msg me 16:55, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
If [the DRV] doesn't end in overturning, [the merge] still needs to be carried out, and there's no guarantee anybody's going to remember to restore the tag. – Joe (talk) 16:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't believe its likely that an article that has been through lengthy AFD and DRV discussions is going to be just forgotten about like that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:16, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
You'd be surprised. I come across articles that have been left in limbo for years after an AfD because of a forgotten or misplaced template (perhaps why I'm coming at this from a different perspective to you). People tend to lose interest when it's no longer a debate. – Joe (talk) 17:23, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red July 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 7, Nos 251, 252, 274, 275, 276


Online events:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New pages patrol needs your help!

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

Hello Joe Roe/Archives,

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

Reminders:

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

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - July 2023

Delivered July 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

11:53, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red 8th Anniversary

Women in Red 8th Anniversary
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

On GEOLAND

Concerning this edit, I'd suggest you take a look at my comments, including this recent one about WP:V but also earlier statements of my position about geographical Notability like this one. I am an editor comfortable with and supportive of the GEOLAND status quo, and I belive the current proposal, preferably with a couple of wikilinks included, is as close to the status quo as the community is likely to support - it certainly comes nowhere near applying GNG to all-purpose official geographical units, which option I suspect would receive significant support in an open-ended RfC. Under these circumstances, I wonder if you might consider backing away from insisting on an RfC, so long as the details of the emerging consensus can be worked out? Newimpartial (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not really into this type of 'tactical' thinking. The only reason to worry about asking for broader input on a question is that you think you won't like the answer, and I don't think that's really in the spirit of consensus-based governance. My comment wasn't intended to insist on a formal RfC (or anything), just point out the absurdity of calling a complete rewrite of GEOLAND a "relatively minor change" or invoking BOLD for a policy change that's already been discussed to death. – Joe (talk) 09:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, it is a "relatively minor change" in terms of the expected impact on deletion results, and BOLD was being invoked in the sense of "there is consensus here, so let's skip the formalities in implementation".
Also, I disagree that The only reason to worry about asking for broader input on a question is that you think you won't like the answer - I mean, depending on what is meant by "not liking the answer". My main concern about unnecessary RfCs is that I have frequently seen "no consensus" results enshrine unfortunate or unintended situations, and ill-timed or ill-formulated processes are one of the main factors leading to those suboptimal results.
Certainly I agree that "avoiding an RfC because the community might want something different from what you want" isn't in the spirit of community governance, but that is not in any way my concern. Newimpartial (talk) 09:48, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi, I was wondering if you were still okay with giving me back autopatrolled when I asked? You mentioned that discussion in my user rights log if you don't remember what I'm talking about. But the gist is I'm feeling more confident than I was then. I'm also still creating articles and I've been really inspired lately about content gaps in my local area. I typically work in draftspace before I move to mainspace. I also admit that I'd prefer to not get constant emails whenever my redirects are automatically reviewed. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Although it's no big deal if things stay the way they are. Sometimes a second pair of eyes can be useful. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: No problem at all, done. – Joe (talk) 08:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red August 2023

Women in Red August 2023, Vol 9, Iss 8, Nos 251, 252, 277, 278, 279, 280


Online events:

See also:

  • Wikimania 2023 will be held in Singapore, 16–19 August, and will be facilitated by the
    affiliates in the ESEAP (East/South East/Asia/Pacific) region.

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive:
  • On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2023

Delivered August 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

10:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Joe Roe. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Barkeep49 (talk) 16:32, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Ballooning backlog

I saw that you are away. I made a comment at RFA about a "Ballooning Backlog" at NPP. I do not think either one of us knew that it would triple in the two months that followed Novem Linguae's RFA. Safe travels. Lightburst (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

September 2023 at Women in Red

Women in Red September 2023, Vol 9, Iss 9, Nos 251, 252, 281, 282, 283


Online events:

Tip of the month:

  • The books she wrote might be notable, too; learn 5 quick tips about about book articles.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Victuallers (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2023

Delivered September 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, you recently accepted me for new pages patrol, and were worried about my low accept rate in AfC. I had a bit of a think afterwards about why it was so low and I realised I think I get anxious about accepting articles I think are good, and leave them to others because I worry much more about getting told off for accepting something I shouldn't. I wouldn't have thought about this if you hadn't had pointed it out to me, and now it's something I can work on, so I appreciate you pointing it out to me and I'm sorry for getting a bit defensive. Diligence is important and I'm glad you are :) -- NotCharizard 🗨 07:27, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries. If it helps, I don't think you're any more likely to be criticised for accepting something than for not accepting something :) – Joe (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Pardon me for missing something, but the user above does not seem to be a member of NPP according to Special:UserRights/Notcharizard despite being granted for a trial? ( I only came across this only while randomly looking at WP:PERM/NPP on my watchlist out of curiousity). Thanks for your work at PERM. Regards- VickKiang (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Oops, forgot to actually press the button. Thanks VickKiang. – Joe (talk) 09:56, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Autopatrol and me

Hi Joe: I'd like to be listed for privileges conferred by Autopatrol. Wikipedia:Autopatrolled, as it may facilitate by posting of New Articles. The updated system for new articles may require a "4-month or more" waiting period. My articles are largely "finished" as I post them. What say you? 36hourblock (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi 36hourblock. I'm afraid you don't yet meet the minimum criteria for autopatrolled. But when you say system, I think you're talking about Articles for Creation? If so the good news is that's completely optional – and generally not recommended for experienced users like yourself. Next time you want to create an article, just navigate to the title/click on a red link (for example, one of these days I want to create Tell Qarassa North) and click on "create" or "create source". That way there's no wait or review process (well except new pages patrol, but that's much lighter than AfC). – Joe (talk) 12:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

This doesn't make sense to me. I still need to go through the New Article process, which will be directed into the same "4-month-or-more" process. The system is not "completely optional" as I have experienced it. --36hourblock (talk) 17:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@36hourblock: You don't need to though. For example, I can see you have Draft:Make Light of It: Collected Stories of William Carlos Williams waiting for review. Instead of doing that, you could simply move it to the article space yourself. Or let's say you want to create an article about The Cod Head by the same author next, simply click this link, write an initial stub, and click on "publish page" – you bypass a draft altogether. It's hard to explain but easy when you know how. Just don't use the article wizard. – Joe (talk) 17:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

A few thoughts (and thanks)

Firstly, I highly appreciate and thank your excellent and hard work in reviewing PERM/NPP, which is often backlogged for weeks. On my watchlist I saw this request. I previously waffled between whether I should comment but decided not to. I will note that my direct interactions with that editor have been positive. Their AfD match rate is only <60%, which I don't know how it's stellar. In the past they've frequently removed BLPPRODs incorrectly (User talk:Ortizesp#BLPPROD notice), but other editors posted the warnings before I noticed these, and I also recalled this but decided not to comment then as the AfD in question was contentious. I am not questioning your overall judgement, but given your high standards with granting NPP/PERM, I am slightly surprised that you granted a full perm and recommended them to RfA. Again, I understand that PERM is a highly difficult and time-consuming area IMO as a non-admin and I highly respect and commend your work there, and this isn't a criticism or anything.

Also, thanks for expanding the history section on WP:NPP- maybe they could go in a separate page instead of being in the tutorial, but these info on the older history very interesting to me. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 22:02, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, yes, I was obviously feeling generous then. I'll make sure to keep an eye on their reviewing for the time being. – Joe (talk) 13:35, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soben Huon (2nd nomination)

Please could you restore this article per your offer at the AFD? There seem to be a fair few book and article coverages with reasonable suggestion that GNG is met. The OP presented no evidence at all, plus this was a unanimous keep last time it was nominated in 2006, so I don't think this was the correct outcome. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't think a keep outcome 17 years ago—when as you know expectations were rather different at AfD—should inoculate an article from soft deletion indefinitely. But yes, it's a soft deletion so I've no problem at all restoring it. – Joe (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Notcharizard

Could you review your granting of AfC reviewer perms to this editor, please. The three reviews of academics I've checked are completely wrong. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

I have said I will avoid reviewing academics until I understand the guidelines of them better, and also that I was hesitant to accept those ones because the submitter was being paid to write them. -- NotCharizard 🗨 03:23, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
@Espresso Addict: I granted NotCharizard new page reviewer. They were an AfC reviewer (which doesn't require a PERM, just an entry on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants) before that and would continue to be even if I revoked NPR. In any case, their NPR right is scheduled to expire in a couple of weeks so it'll be reviewed in due course.
@Notcharizard: Topics covered by SNGs are tricky. I think it's a good idea not to review articles or drafts in those areas until you're comfortable with the relevant guideline. – Joe (talk) 06:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Joe Roe/Archives,

New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Your revert

I wanted to let you know why I reverted 11 edits at Genocides in history (before World War I). These edits were made by a block-evading long-term abuser known as the Bad copyediting IP. For more information see User:Nythar/User tracking#Bad copyediting IP. I normally revert their edits on sight, and, as can be seen in the diffs you provided, they have a habit of adding excessive numbers wikilinks, in some cases adding dozens of irrelevant "see also" links. Their block evasion is a major factor behind my reverts, and their copyediting, more often than not, negatively affects articles. I also don't want to spend my time salvaging their constructive edits (which are rare) from a sea of unconstructive ones. I don't often report them at AIV because very few (if any) admins are aware of their editing habits, and to have them successfully blocked I need to present a large amount of evidence in every report. Perhaps in the future I'll state the reason I'm reverting their edits in my edit summaries instead of just using rollback. Regards, Nythar (💬-🍀) 12:45, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nythar: Thanks for the explanation. I think an edit summary would be useful in future. – Joe (talk) 07:04, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Quick note on Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)

Thanks for your edits to Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab).

Wait what idea lab almost never has topics closed? Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 04:34, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes. – Joe (talk) 04:39, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

AfCs and ancient languages

Hi, I thought I'd take the time to respond to this comment since you are an experienced editor. Usually it's the managers of the garage bands complaining about articles being declined :) If you look at the decline notice, it does not state that the "entire ancient language" is not notable, but rather that "this draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article". To do so, sources are required to be:

  • in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
  • reliable
  • secondary
  • independent of the subject

The single source provided in the submission I declined (not rejected, which means that the topic is deemed not suitable for Wikipedia at all, with no opportunity to resubmit) in no way meets these requirements. It's misunderstanding the role of volunteer AfC reviewers to expect them to be experts in everything they review. Much as I would like to be knowledgeable in ancient languages, botany, astronomy, crypto entrepreneurs, self-published literature as well as garage bands etc., all I am evaluating is whether the existing references meet the notability guidelines. If the language in question is really notable, and not, for example, a hoax, a maverick researcher's non-notable opinion, then there will be multiple independent sources written about that. It is not for the reviewer to track down these sources, but for those contributing to the draft to do so.

I note that you are have an interest in Women in Red. I focus on reviews in that area as well. The AfC backlog is huge, and submissions can languish for many months before being reviewed, by which time the contributors may have lost motivation. A quick decline is a positive, and provides contributors an opportunity to quickly make the required changes to an improperly-sourced submission.

You are welcome to explore more at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation. I know you're involved in other areas, but also you're welcome to get involved if you wish - we are under-resourced and would value assistance. While the volume of drivel flung at us can be overwhelming, it's an opportunity to help get notable topics approved, and attract new contributors. Greenman (talk) 16:07, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Greenman. I've been an AfC reviewer for about 12 years, but thanks for the info. – Joe (talk) 04:13, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
As an admin, you're doing an excellent job on New page patrol and WP:PERM/NPP. Keep up the good work, and don't forget to take care of yourself, mate. Cheers! 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 05:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

New page reviewer right

Hi Joe, you recently gave the new page reviewer right to Ortizesp. I recently tried unsuccessfully to chat to this editor about a non-reliable source they had used and noticed that their talk page contained numerous AfD notifications. Yesterday, they added a copyrighted image to an article, which was promptly deleted. I know they've been around the block, but these things suggest that they shouldn't be a new page reviewer. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

  • Hey mate, the single "non-reliable" source is a non-issue. I'm on vacation and would just edit it out, but looking at the "About Us" page on the publication, I think its reliable enough for a passing reference. Also the AFDs are because NFOOTY got deprecated this year, so lots of articles that were once deemed noteable now aren't. I've created thousands of other pages that haven't been deleted. Cheers.Ortizesp (talk) 22:44, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Modussiccandi. When I review PERM requests I'm not overly concerned by deletion nominations, since those don't indicate the user has made a mistake in assessing the notability of a topic, only that someone else thinks they might have. I look for what the outcome of the AfD was, and XTools shows that a miniscule proportion of Ortizesp's 4,251 created pages have been deleted. That's actually quite impressive given the community's recent decision to tighten standards for biographies football players, mentioned by Ortizesp above.
I'm also not really convinced that a dispute over the reliability of a single source, or a deletion on Commons, is the kind of thing that would usually prompt us to reconsider a user's perms. But of course just because I assigned Ortizesp NPR it doesn't mean I'm the arbiter of whether he keeps it; if you have specific reviewing actions you're concerned about, you might try WP:XRV, otherwise there's ANI for seeking the removal of perms. – Joe (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Fair enough; I am happy to concede the point about the AfDs! The image deletion is an absolute no brainer to me and I think reviewers ought to have a firm handle on that sort of thing. It's hardly encouraging to find such signs of careless editing in a reviewer at first glance. I'll let the matter rest for the time being. Modussiccandi (talk) 07:09, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
The image wasn't tagged for copvio when I added it. I don't upload the images, or judge their content i just add them as they show up on commons.12:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC) Ortizesp (talk) 12:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
@Modussiccandi: Fwiw, I raised a somewhat similar thread not long ago. I had a look at their log and noticed a few obvious mistakes (i.e., this tagging of db-person which was obviously incorrect for a reserve and this PROD which was even flagged as incorrect according to the template added itself as it has had multipled AfD discussions before), though both pages are unsuitable for inclusion, and the patrolling of 3 or 4 articles a minute. Now obviously for articles for politcian/species/populated area stubs and the like this is absolutely fine, or when marking as patrolled for pages created by editors who the reviewer is familiar with and has little/no issues requiring NPP intervention, but it doesn't seem to be the case here so it is not ideal. However, I don't think their error rate is bad (I still make some embarassing errors while reviewing even one year on...) to the extent that their perm should be immediately removed, but it's probably worth keeping an eye on. VickKiang (talk) 08:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red October 2023

Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286


Online events:

See also

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - October 2023

Delivered October 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

13:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Admin graphics

Hi Joe. I saw File:Outcome of English Wikipedia RfAs in the discretionary range.svg and would like to present some related analysis on The Signpost. Do you have a graphic that shows all the RfAs, not just the ones in the discretionary range? Thanks in advance... ☆ Bri (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bri: Something like this? File:Outcome of English Wikipedia RfAs.svg. – Joe (talk) 05:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

GMH Melbourne's autopatrolled right

They say that they understand which pages that qualify for deletion and which are fine for wikipedia, yet they nominated a state highway article for deletion when WP:GEOROAD exists. Not sure giving them autopatrolled was the right call. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 15:01, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Note that the AfD was closed as 'delete' by an admin indicating that the AfD nomination was the correct call. I do not appreciate this attempt to discredit me. It goes against WP:Etiquette guidelines. If @LilianaUwU has a problem with my conduct, or have a problem with a permission I have been granted, WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is the place to raise the matter, not on someone else's talk page without even notifying me. ––– GMH MELBOURNE 03:49, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Totally agreed. – Joe (talk) 05:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red - November 2023

Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289


Online events:

See also

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

List of international cricket centuries by Desmond Haynes

How do I go about restoring List of international cricket centuries by Desmond Haynes? You closed the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket centuries by Desmond Haynes a couple of years ago. It was a good close, but one of the worst AfD results ever. Not only could this easily be a featured list; not only is it an integral part of Template:International cricket centuries, but the main argument addressing the nominator's specific issue - namely, that Haynes previously held the record for ODI centuries, and received plenty of coverage for that when Tendulkar broke the record - was never mentioned. StAnselm (talk) 17:33, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Well the result was to merge it to Desmond Haynes#Centuries, so you can just work on it in there or undo the redirect. The former content is still in the history. – Joe (talk) 06:18, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
OK, thank you. I have restored the article and added a couple of citations to address notability concerns. StAnselm (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Speaking of this guy,

I was finding sources for a bunch of unreferenced eclipse articles and, because ReFill doesn't process space.com author metadata properly, I had to mess around with it manually, which means I had to move this same guy's name around like twenty times, and the same guy had written a bunch of articles that were broadly similar and I was citing them in articles that were quite monotonous, so I was getting to the point of noticing minor details, and at this point you may be wondering why this has anything to do with you, but the guy's name reminded me of someone -- hope you are doing well. jp×g 09:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Haha yes, I followed him on Twitter... he never followed back :( – Joe (talk) 09:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Joe Roe:

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

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

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

There is a backlog of over 1800 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023 NPP backlog drive – Points award

The Working Man's Barnstar
This award is given to Joe Roe for collecting more than 10 points during the October 2023 NPP backlog drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to the drive! Hey man im josh (talk) 02:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - November 2023

Delivered November 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

11:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Quick Question about NPPBIG3

Hi Joe, I was doing some NPP, ironically enough, and came across this redirect NPPBIG3 that you created. Did you mean for it to be in articlespace? All the best! TartarTorte 15:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@TartarTorte: No I didn't, thanks for spotting that. – Joe (talk) 15:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef
readded Tamzin
removed Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

added Pppery
removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
  • Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
  • Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
  • Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
  • Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
  • Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
  • An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

SSSniperWolf draft rejection

You rejected Draft:SSSniperWolf with the comment "There is a broad consensus that SSSniperWolf does not currently meet Wikipedia's notability", referring to the last AfD. The articles from Time, NBC, Polygon, Forbes and Kotaku did not exist when the last AfD closed, so that AfD is obsolete. DoubleGrazing added a similar comment. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I referred to the last AfD as an example; the four before that, and the the deletion review, and the RfD, and the AN discussion, and the BLPN discussion, are obviously also relevant. An experienced user like yourself knows that there's technically nothing stopping you recreating the article as long as it doesn't exactly duplicate the one deleted at AfD, but both AfC and AfD are chronically backlogged processes and I don't think we can afford to use so much volunteer time asking people to review the same article again and again with slightly better sources. That's what I meant when I said that any new draft needs to make a very compelling case that the available sourcing has substantially changed. If and when you think you've assembled the sources you need to overcome the weight of prior consensus then by all means recreate it; I'd be happy to move it over full protection if you need me to. But an extra 200 words and eight sources on the latest manufactured influencer spat ain't it. – Joe (talk) 19:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red December 2023

Women in Red December 2023, Vol 9, Iss 12, Nos 251, 252, 290, 291, 292


Online events:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Joe. :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - December 2023

Delivered December 2023 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

19:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
  • The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
  • Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays
We are not always on the same side of issues, but, I wanted to be the first to wish you the very best during the holidays. . Lightburst (talk) 19:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

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

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

Feedback on essay

Hey Joe, are you open to feedback on the NPP essay you just published? If so, would you prefer it at the talk page of User:Joe Roe/Seven tips for new page patrolling or at your user talk page? Hey man im josh (talk) 13:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Of course. Shall we say the essay's talk page? – Joe (talk) 13:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Request

Dear Joe Roe, Hello, Can you proceeded my request at WP:PERM/A?😊~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 05:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

It looks like Aoidh is on top of it. – Joe (talk) 09:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Dear Joe Roe, Thank you for reply but I think If you review my contribution and my article, so, What you happen about I'm eligible for autopatrolled?, I happy if you review my article and give me some specific suggestion to improvement releated to my article.If you feel confortable.😊~~ αvírαm|(tαlk) 14:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec23}}~~~~ to your friends' talk pages. 

★Trekker (talk) 10:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red January 2024

Women in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296


Online events:

Announcement

  • In 2024 Women in Red also has a one biography a week challenge as part
    of the #1day1woman initiative!

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Joe_Roe/Archives/2023&oldid=1197188413"