User talk:Kharkiv07/Archives/2017/April

New page reviewer

Hello Kharkiv07. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 18,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:26, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Please subscribe to the ACC mailing list

Hi Kharkiv07. I noticed that you are handling requests on ACC, but it does not appear that you have resubscribed to the ACC mailing list since your account was reactivated. Before handling any further requests, please visit this page to resubscribe to the ACC mailing list. Please ensure you follow all directions carefully, including sending us an identity confirmation email, or your your subscription request will be rejected. Please be advised that being subscribed to the ACC mailing list is mandatory for all active ACC members; if you do not subscribe, your access to ACC may be suspended. If you are subscribed, please double-check that your subscription is active and let me know by sending me an email using Special:EmailUser, and I apologize if I have sent you this message in error. Thanks, FastLizard4 (talk•contribs) 02:05, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

 Done Sorry about that! Kharkiv07 (T) 02:08, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

No worries! I see your identification email, but not an actual subscription request yet. Make sure you filled out and submitted the form on the subscription page; if you did, check your email (including spam folders and such) for an email with a link to click to verify your subscription request. We need both the identification email and the subscription request before we can add you to the mailing list. Thanks! --FastLizard4 (talk•contribs) 02:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

A message from Khansher40

Hello dear Kharkiv07. My sole edit was that I requested a reference for an edit which was made in the past few days. The edit claimed that the Durand Line is "not the permanent and internationally recognized" border. I fail to understand that how a simple request of mine for a citation for a possibly questionable claim was not neutral. On the contrary, I believe that the edits that were made just before my "citation needed" edit contained questionable claims and therefore it was those edits that were biased. One edit claimed that the Durand Line is "not" an internationally recognized border while the one before it claimed that it is a "temporary" border. I strongly believe that it was those edits that were not neutral while my "citation needed" edit was merely inquisitive in nature.

Apart from this issue, I believe that it would be more appropriate and factual that the Durand Line be referred to as "disputed international border" since Afghanistan does not agree with the said border. How can a border be declared as "internationally recognized" when not all countries agree with it? It does not make sense and does not present the matter to the reader in its truest form.

Nevertheless, I thank you for undoing the misleading edit and hope that you now have a clear picture of which of the recent edits were mine and which weren't mine. --Khansher40 (talk) 04:00, 4 April 2017 (UTC) Khansher40 (talk) 04:00, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For closing the deletion discussion for Katya Lee when you did. Perfectly timed. Mabalu (talk) 14:16, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Journal on European History of Law

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Journal on European History of Law. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Randykitty (talk) 14:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal on European History of Law (2nd nomination)

Hi, you closed this as "keep" despite the fact that each and every keep !vote basically boiled down to WP:ILIKEIT and was not policy based. I'd greatly appreciate if you could undo your close and relist the AfD to generate more discussion. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 08:56, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

• Hi again, I see you haven't edited in almost a week now, hope all is well. As no reply seems to be forthcoming, I'm taking this to DRV. --Randykitty (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

  @Randykitty: I would've reverted it for you, but thanks for taking care of that. Kharkiv07 (T) 13:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC)