User talk:TheBirdsShedTears/Archives/2022/June

Easy-merge

Hi. I'm not sure how it fits into your workflow, but I think it might be better not to use the Easy-merge script to add attribution templates when simply redirecting pages without actually merging the content. It might confuse later editors looking at the talk page and page histories. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for June 2022 Afghanistan earthquake

On 22 June 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article June 2022 Afghanistan earthquake, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Kackerterhaff

Hello, About the draft I've been working on I've added a section for History to give the article a bit more reason to exist as the settlement having some historical background. However the only citation I was able to find for the history of the town was Wordpress and was written I believe the the family that lived there for 300 years. When I was publishing my Draft it gave me a warning that these citations shouldn't be used due to them typically not following WP:SELFSOURCE however it was clear that there were exceptions. You may say that if the source isn't valid I should find another and when I mention there aren't any you might say therefore the topic is non-notable however WP:GEOLAND states than any officially recognised, populated place, any officially recognised abandoned place or most unofficial populated places all are considered notable enough to warrant an article. Kackerterhaff is both officially recognised and populated and therefore qualifies for notability. Anyway back to the references, all the information I'm writing about is essentially the population over time of Kackerterhaff, who lived there and when. This is because nearly the entire population of Kackerterhaff was one family whom wrote about themselves. Wikipedia generally frowns upon citing self-published information due to the fact that this family will be writing biased information because they are writing about themselves, However I', only citing information regarding the Births, Deaths and Marriages of the few citizens and only some of those and there is no incentive to lie about when your 200 year old ancestors had children and the years they were born. Therefore I believe this information can be taken as factual and therefore cited as a source. One might also say that writing about the family history is non notable but in this case whatever happens to the family directly correlated to the history of the settlement as Kackerterhaff is simply that small and I will again cite WP:GEOLAND So after all that do you think I can cite this in Draft:Kackerterhaff? N1TH Music (talk) 08:56, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

N1TH Music, I never said anything about its notability. But i tagged it with unreliable source template[1] which you removed than addressing the issue. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 12:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

What's the unreliable source template? Also I'm aware you never questioned the article's notability just I needed to clarify we were on the same page. N1TH Music (talk) 14:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@TheBirdsShedTears Sorry I forgot to tag you in my previous message so I assume you didn't see it, could you please reply? N1TH Music (talk) 16:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

When an article is cited with unreliable sources, we usually tag it with {{unreliable sources}} to indicate that articles has some unreliable sources which needs to be replaced by reliable source. It is also interesting that you removed that tag from your article you created without addressing the issues and now you are asking 'what is unreliable source template'. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 03:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

I see, I think I was clearing it away because I believed I had reliable sources at the time just not enough of them. N1TH Music (talk) 05:17, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello TheBirdsShedTears/Archives/2022,

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 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.

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: 12875 articles, as of 00:00, 18 November 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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)