User talk:Wikipediæ philosophia/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Your submission at Articles for creation: Italy women's national football team results (2020–present) (March 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Kashmorwiki were: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Italy women's national football team results (2020–present) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Italy women's national football team results (2020–present), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 17:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Italy women's national football team results (2020–present) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Italy women's national football team results (2020–present). Thanks! Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 03:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Italy women's national football team results (2020–present) has been accepted

Italy women's national football team results (2020–present), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop welcoming editors and thanking them for their contributions when they do not in fact have any contributions. That is an necessary edit and could be confusing to the editor. See User:Darryl_The_Terrible for just one example. If you do not stop these and other disruptive edits, you will face sanctions up to and including possible blocks. I am not templating you as I wanted to leave extended information, but consider this a formal warning. StarM 21:53, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi: I didn't know this rule. I add this fact in my list of User:Dr Salvus#Things not to do. It won't repeat again. Dr_Salvus (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Star Mississippi Which users can I welcome? Dr Salvus 12:20, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, you may welcome any user who has made positive contributions and who has not been welcomed. However that doesn't mean you should. There's no need to, unless there's a specific reason you want to. I suggest focusing on one area and improving there rather than trying to do all the things. StarM 12:44, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Italian friendlies from the pre-internet era

Hi there, I was wondering if you could help. Some years ago, there was a mass creation of articles on Italian friendly matches, for example Torneo Città di Bologna and Coppa Misura (Cesena). There seem to be a good 20 to 30 articles with similar lack of content and sourcing. Firstly, are they notable? Nothing in the article indicates that these matches are actually notable or significant in any way. Secondly, assuming that they did receive significant coverage, is there a way of accessing Italian newspaper archives to find sources for them? Thanks! Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

@Spiderone: I am afraid that these articles do not meet the WP: GNG criterias Dr Salvus 12:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi again Dr Salvus, I hope all is well. I was wondering if you could take a look at Torneo Nicola Ceravolo and Torneo Città di Milano. The referencing is obviously minimal, at the moment. Do you think that there is any chance that these friendly tournaments could be notable? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The Milano tournament, I found one source here. I can't really read any of it as my Italian is weak. I can't find anything about the Ceravolo tournament... Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Spiderone: These aren't notable Dr Salvus 17:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Real Madrid

The aforementioned team has not guaranteed its qualification for any competition next season so you have to wait.--Sakiv (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Sakiv Can the redirect be canceled now? Dr Salvus 21:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Following WP procedures 2

My friend, this is the exact same thing that I and others tried to explain to you, and which got you in such trouble, earlier this month. You have apparently jumped (once again) to a somewhat advanced step to get your List of Coppa Italia finals into Did You Know, but you did it without following the instructions. If you had followed those instructions, you would have seen that List of Coppa Italia finals does not meet the requirements at WP:DYKRULES. It was neither created, nor expanded five-fold, in the last 7 days, and it's not a GA at all anyway. You also listed the article under March 27, which is supposed to be the date it was expanded fivefold, but of course, the article isn't even four times the size it was when you created it last June.

I strongly recommend that you withdraw your nomination, so that you don't needlessly irritate the hard-working editors who tend the DYK project. Otherwise, I can well imagine that somebody will bring you back to AN/I, and you don't want that. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, this is precisely why I recommended you sit back and watch before jumping in. You are not familiar enough to submit your own DYKs (for what it's worth, neither am I). Please take the advice from JohnFromPinckney and withdraw. StarM 00:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi all, I just marked the DYK submission as ineligible [1] and came here to let Dr Salvus know, and didn't notice the above comments until now. JohnFromPinckney and StarM are correct, this is not eligible for DYK at this time, and unfortunately will not likely be eligible in the future, since it's a list and can't be promoted to GA status. I recommend slowing down and following the excellent advice that the other editors have been giving you, and asking questions if you need help. Kind regards, DanCherek (talk) 03:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@JohnFromPinckney, Star Mississippi, and DanCherek: I apologize. I think I have not read the instructions correctly. Now I just have to withdraw my candidacy. Dr Salvus 09:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: After this, I intend to withdraw the application. Maybe I'm too distracted but I can't find the procedures to withdraw the application Dr Salvus 10:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

No worries, another editor will come along in a few days and formally close the nomination and tag it as such, so no further action is needed on your part. Thanks! Hope to see you at DYK in the future, let me know if you have any questions about it. DanCherek (talk) 13:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

FYI for other passing editors

JUst noting this parallel thread on my Talk: User talk:Star Mississippi#My distructive changes While I have warned this user that he's very close to a trip back to ANI, I do think he's trying to edit in good faith. This is a genuine lack of competence, rather than one of malice, and the user may be young. Hope this can have a different outcome. StarM 14:11, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi: I don't want to go back to those terrible days when I was in WP: ANI. I could not even sleep at night and did poorly in (redacted) despite my getting very good (redact). Furthermore, I had fallen into depression and anguish. To avoid this I have decided not to name any articles in GA, FA, FL and DYK Dr Salvus 14:19, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, hi, you might remember I gave you some feedback a while ago. You say that To avoid this I have decided not to name any articles in GA, FA, FL and DYK. Have you decided this now, or are you saying that you decided this before? Because you were strongly advised to make that decision a couple of weeks ago, right, but you still chose to nominate Template:Did you know nominations/List of Coppa Italia finals two days ago?

I'm sorry to hear that the ANI discussion in the past caused you distress. You should always try to prioritise (redacted) work where you can and if you are overly obsessing with Wikipedia, you need to ask yourself whether it's worthwhile trying to continue to edit here. You say English is your third language, so I would find it surprising if you were able to write well enough for DYK, GA, FA and FL—I myself can barely do this with English as my native language. You also mentioned recently that you're struggling to think of things you can do on Wikipedia. Isn't that a sign that you might want to step away? If you like the idea of contributing to a wiki, perhaps you could find a Fandom (formerly called "Wikia") wiki on a topic you enjoy that needs help. Or if you like learning, maybe a quiz website like Sporcle might be rewarding.

If you do want to stay on Wikipedia, that's great, but you need to find some easier areas to work in that are more suited to your skills. For instance, we have a lot of poor-quality articles about TV episodes at my neck of the woods, WikiProject Television, and we'd benefit from people finding a TV show they like with already-existing articles for each episode that are undersourced and adding reliable reviews (from newspapers, not blogs) to the "Reception" section.

I assume you're aware of different language versions of Wikipedia, but we also have sister projects like Wiktionary (wiki dictionary), Wikiquote or Wikidata that you might enjoy learning about. But the principles you have hopefully learned from your experiences here—take things slowly, don't repeat the same mistakes if you get constructive feedback, and reach out for help before you're at the last chance saloon—apply everywhere you go. — Bilorv (talk) 21:37, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: I'm afraid I'm not proficient with WP: TV and other Wikimedia projects Dr Salvus 14:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Dr Salvus: what I'm saying is that you could become proficient with such projects, whereas you seem to be struggling to become proficient in the areas you are currently working. — Bilorv (talk) 17:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

{u|Dr_Salvus}} if you're not taking Bilorv's (excellent) suggestion because you see GA,FA,DYK as a route to adminship and TV not, I suggest you have a second thought. Writing good content is more important than getting awards for your content. Focus on what you enjoy writing about, not what you think you should. StarM 17:55, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: I decided to abandon the GA, FA and FL awards until the end of 2021 after the opening of the discussion WP: ANI, to which was also added DYK after having failed this nomination. Dr Salvus 14:17, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Star Mississippi I have decided that I will not take these awards into consideration, if you see discussions with other users it is to discuss how to improve a page (for example List of Coppa Italia finals or Serie A Footballer of the Year). Despite my young age, I know a lot about football. Could my good football edit one day lead me to be sysop? Unfortunately I don't think I am competent with the projects proposed by Bilorv. Dr Salvus 18:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Dr_Salvus sure. If you look at my user pace you'll see I write on museums, art, historic sites and some random topics. I think I may have had a DYK (there's probably someone who knows how to check, I don't), but have never had a Good or Featured Article. I would recommend just focusing on writing about what you enjoy, whether that's footy, music or anything else. Don't worry about where that writing might lead. It takes a very long time to become an administrator, and there are relatively few. That is not something to focus on at this stage of your editing career. StarM 18:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

(No recorded DYKs, Star Mississippi. This tool is the easiest way to test: this page would list them if you had any, compare something like mine for what the tool looks like when you do have some. Anyway, this supports your point that DYK/GA/FA is not necessary as a route to adminship.) — Bilorv (talk) 18:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, why do you want to be an administrator? They are like the janitors of this website—admin tasks are about taking out the trash (deleting pages that the community have decided to delete, blocking people who are not here to help etc.) so that all of us can get on with the important jobs of writing an encyclopedia. I think you need to rid yourself of the goal of becoming an administrator, because if that is your only goal then you are likely to fail it and waste a lot of time in the process. Perhaps you could set a new goal involving improvement of the encyclopedia and making a positive impact on our readers. (That goal doesn't have to involve anything that's "featured" or recognised by the community. For instance, when I write new articles I often don't put them through DYK, GA etc. but I have my own criteria for when it's a success: when I'm happy with the writing, enjoyed learning about the topic, think the page would be useful to someone researching the topic etc.) — Bilorv (talk) 18:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi and Bilorv: I study the behavior of administrators. I look closely at the decisions you administrators make and when you have been successful candidates for sysop. I would have a thousand questions to ask an administrator about administrator action procedures, but I would end up boring you. I often dream of becoming a sysop at night. But for now I'm not obsessed and I'm not in a hurry. Dr Salvus 19:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, in case you were including me in that. I was quite interested in becoming one when I was younger, but I gained a new perspective over time. I implore you to think again about what I've written above: being an admin is not a bad thing to be, but it's not the be-all and end-all, not the most important thing an editor can be, and not the right path for you within the next couple of years. — Bilorv (talk) 19:41, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Please don't worry about the messed up ping. It's hard at times and I struggle to keep up with the changes to Wikipedia. I became an admin at a very different time in my life. I certainly couldn't have earned it now. You can see I was very active in 2008-09 but other than 2012, minimally so until last year when my workspace changed and I had more ability to edit. Personally I enjoy updating articles and writing new ones. I don't do many "admin jobs" although I did monitor WP:UAA reports for a while as I was active at a time of day when others weren't and could help keep the make manageable. You can also see the kinds of pages I've created. I think, Dr. Salvus, if you look around the football projects you'll find articles that need work. As you work on them, like you did above helping Spiderone with non-notable articles in a language you could read that (I presume) he can't, you'll become a more accomplished editor. Don't stress about being an admin. It really isn't that exciting. StarM 21:46, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi: I

I probably had a desire to be sysop due to my narcissistic nature. I thought being sysop was a series of privileges, but instead it involves a series of commitments, such as checking the WP: ANI frequently. I would like to know more about this topic so I would like to ask other sysops what life is like as an administrator. Thank you for explaining your version to . Dr Salvus 22:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)me

For sure. It's best described as more responsibility, even though we're all volunteers. I don't have to check UAA/AIV,but if no one does, there's a backlog. You're not missing out on anything by not being an admin. Much as you might shadow people while considering different jobs, you could do that on Wikipedia too. See what they're interested in and why.I love watching Bot Operators' projects even though I don't have the technical skills to implement one. StarM 00:49, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

::@Star Mississippi: Let's change subject. I am no longer interested in the FL nomination of List of Coppa Italia finals so I will ask you this question out of simple curiosity. Do you think the failure of this FL candidacy of this page is caused by the lack of data about attendance on the oldest finals? Dr Salvus 19:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Star Mississippi isn't the editor who can answer this. It failed because of all the reasons outlined in each of the three featured list nominations. Re-read these comments again to see the reasons why it failed. — Bilorv (talk) 20:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv:

I think the article meets all FL criterias (exempt the 6th). Unfortunately I shouldn't have candidate it for the third time, which made this article unsuitable for FL. I have made all the improvements proposed. Now I will not name any GA, FA, FL and DYK until December. Dr Salvus 21:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Bilorv. I am unfamiliar with the workings of featured lists, but in addition to the links Bilorv gave you, Dr_Salvus I recommend the thread above from JohnFromPinckney which had some helpful information as to process and how they work. StarM 21:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The article does not meet all FL criteria, and the generously detailed comments at the nominations tell you why. By wrongly saying that the third nomination opening is what "made this article unsuitable" (it was only one factor), you are showing that you do not listen to editor feedback. You allude to the issue above with "lack of data about attendance", but that you have tried your hardest to find data and not found any does not mean that no data exists, anywhere. You will run into problems wherever you go on Wikipedia if you continue to ignore editors' feedback. — Bilorv (talk) 21:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Bilorv I probably won't have read enough or I won't have explained myself well. Not a problem, it means that I will read the indications even more Dr Salvus 21:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Bilorv I want to take all my time. I'm not in a hurry. It is not necessary to have created an FL to have a better reputation. Dr Salvus 21:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, I say this in the nicest possible way, but I do see you attempting to pick up all sorts of parts of wikipedia all at once, and my suggestion would be to calm down. Wikipedia is a vast beast with lots of different places people sit and work. As you master one thing, then maybe dip your toe into another. I fear you wish to have advanced rights (admin, rollbacker, pending changes etc.) but we only give these things to people who can and have shown for many months/years that they are trustworthy and know what they are doing. Rather than focussing on things that may be good in a potential RfA, you may be better picking a particular subject and running with that. If you wish to work on content, then find an article on a subject you like, and expand it to include more information and fix it up. When you have done a lot of these, you can look into what the criteria is for GAs or DYKs and see if an article you have made is in a similar nic to others. Or, don't do that, and continue to improve articles, which is what we are all here for.

Or, maybe you'd like to work with counter vandalism. I don't know everything about this, but you don't need advanced rights to do this. You can do this for a while, get to know the processes and then maybe ask for a toolset. I fear you move on too quick and don't read everything which can only hurt you in the long run. I'm here if you need some help, but I feel you would be better off finding your needlehouse. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Lee Vilenski What should I read in your opinion? Dr Salvus 12:54, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

DR Salvus, Lee Vilenski is telling you the same thing Bilorv and I and everyone at the ANI did. There's an english expression, don't bite off more than you can chew which essentially means slow down, don't try to do everything at once. It is good advice and I recommend you heed it. StarM 13:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi and Lee Vilenski: I will listen to the advice. I hope I never forget that. Dr Salvus 13:29, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid my self-centered character has brought me this desire. Dr Salvus 13:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome 2

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 19:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Vaselineeeeeeee: grazie mille. Leggerò tutti questi consigli e poi tornerò ad essere attivo al 100%. Dr Salvus 19:22, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:User hate Among Us

Template:User hate Among Us, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User hate Among Us and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User hate Among Us during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JsfasdF252 (talk) 22:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Deletion question

Hello, Dr Salvus,

Did you want User:Dr Salvus/redwarnRules.json to be deleted as well? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: Yes, I did Dr Salvus 19:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Question and advice

Why are you so desperate to become a rollbacker? Many editors have successfully fought vandalism here for years without seeking or attaining rollbacker rights. Twinkle allows you to deal easily with vandalism, for example. Yet you seem to have asked several times either directly for the right, or how to get it. If you're not careful, you risk being labelled as a hat-collector (especially when combined with you stated desire to become an admin on your user page), and will jeopardise any future chances of getting advanced rights. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Gricehead,

You are right, I have thought about it and I realized there is no need to become a rollbacker to defeat vandalism. Dr Salvus 19:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

North Tonawanda edits

Hello,

Why did you revert the edit made by me on the City of North Tonawanda’s wiki page? The current information is outdated. 74.78.32.31 (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I though that was vandalism. Dr Salvus 22:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus, you have to be selective with which Twinkle button you press for rollback. Twinkle has three types of rollback - rollback, rollback (AGF) and vandalism. Read this to know the differences between the three. Regarding this, you had reverted by clicking "vandalism". That button leaves only a default edit summary and used only for reverting obvious vandalism. This was a correct use of vandalism button. If you felt the North Tonawanda edit was wrong, you could have clicked undo button and given edit summary as "unsourced name change". I see from the above thread that you are interested to become a rollbacker. You need to show sufficiently good judgement about which of Twinkle's rollback buttons you click if you want to be a rollbacker. Good luck. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 16:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Proper attribution for split articles

Hi, I notice you split 2017–18 Coupe de France First Preliminary Round into multiple articles, referring to its "history for attribution", and have now WP:PRODed the original article. The problem is that if/when the article is deleted, then all of its history is deleted as well and then we've got a copyright violation because we don't know who the original authors are. In this case, you should list the original authors on the talk pages of the new split articles. See WP:PATT for more information. Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 00:05, 20 April 2021 (UTC) @DanCherek: The principal editor to this page is @Gricehead: Dr Salvus 06:27, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: @Dr Salvus:. 2017–18 Coupe de France First Preliminary Round was itself a split from 2017–18 Coupe de France Preliminary Rounds (not done by me). No significant material was added to the article during it's life at 2017–18 Coupe de France First Preliminary Round and all the original attribution still exists in the original article. Hope this helps. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 07:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks and invitation

Thank you for your contributions to women's football/soccer articles. I thought I'd let you know about the Women's Football/Soccer Task Force (WP:WOSO), a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women's football/soccer. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the Members page. Thanks!

Hmlarson (talk) 18:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hmlarson:  Done Dr Salvus 10:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for Making non-permitted edits. This is a brief block while allowing other processes to function. Any reviewing admin should contact me privately.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  Nosebagbear (talk) 11:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

April 26 2021

Why did you revert the edits I made to the Daybreak (2019 TV series) page? I condensed it for several reasons, which I had listed in my explanation when I edited. It’s written poorly, is too long and unnecessary (nearly 3000 words), inconsistently switches between first and third tense, makes references to a gay character as “a open Homosexual”, and in reference to another character states “she wears the tradition Hijab Indian Woman wear” which is grammatically and factually incorrect.

I can provide more evidence as to why I edited it, including misspellings, run-on sentences, and unnecessary capitalizations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.36.184 (talk)

156.34.36.184 You can report a false positive of ClueBot NG and delete the warn that I give. Dr Salvus 06:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding text to redirects

...is pointless and shouldn't be done. This is not a good edit (and not good content-wise either, the "premier football competition" is marketing speak which can just as well apply to e.g. the World Cup). Fram (talk) 07:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC) Fram Ok, I've understood Dr Salvus 07:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Automatic hyphen removal

It looks as if here, you simply ddi a search and replace, changing all hyphens to dashes, including changes like "shoot-out" to "shoot–out" or "Quarter-finals" to "Quarter–finals". Please don't make such wholesale replacements. Fram (talk) 07:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Fram I've just fixed Dr Salvus 10:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Talk page blanking

Regarding your restoration of removed content here, other than a small number of items, editors are allowed to remove messages from their talk page. See WP:BLANKING.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC) Ponyo Ok, I didn't know this fact. Dr Salvus 21:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gela

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gela 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 Legobot, on behalf of Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 10:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Tayi Arajakate Thank you. Note for readers: I've nominated this article before the discussion in the WP:ANI Dr Salvus 10:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Discussions at ANI are irrelevant to a good article nomination unless it is related to any ongoing dispute in the article itself or if the nominator were to be topic banned or indefinitely blocked. I don't see any of this being the case here, so it wouldn't be an issue. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 11:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I put this note because there are so many talk page stalkers who constantly monitor my talk and they might think that I have not understood anything from the Ani discussion. if I fail, however, I will not give up as I have done on other occasions Dr Salvus 11:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gela

The article Gela you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Gela for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tayi Arajakate -- Tayi Arajakate (talk) 13:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tayi Arajakate: When I nominated this article I had a lack of understanding of GA. However, I'll try to improve this article. Thanks for the analyzis Dr Salvus 13:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Good to hear that and good luck! I hope you will be able to convert it into a good article in the future. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 13:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Mz7 (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of 2021–22 A.S. Roma season for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2021–22 A.S. Roma season is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021–22 A.S. Roma season until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 (Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 20:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021–22 A.S. Roma season

Hi, just as a note - you should never close a discussion in which you have !voted at XfD - per WP:NACINV. In this case, I don't think it's worth overturning the close, but any further examples of this are likely to see you taken to ANI pretty quickly by someone. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 07:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Gricehead, thanks for the note. Ok, I won't repeat this again Dr Salvus 07:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

As the creator of the article, you are also definately not uninvolved. Please, please be more careful. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Lee Vilenski, Ok, I'll be more careful Dr Salvus 08:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

I have reverted your close. What on earth made you think it was a good idea? If you try anything like that again you will be blocked, OK? GiantSnowman 09:44, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

GiantSnowman Ok, I'll learn from this error. I have already add this fact in my Thing not to do list. Dr Salvus 09:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

It depends. If consensus to keep is clear then at any point, see WP:SPEEDYKEEP. GiantSnowman 10:15, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

User page

You cannot restore the edit and hide its content... GiantSnowman 20:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, OK I didn't know this fact. Thanks for the info Dr Salvus 20:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Multiple sources

Just so you know, in case you don't already: there's nothing wrong with having two reference citations for something. You usually don't want seven, but there's no need to remove a second, reliable source. Happy editing, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

JohnFromPinckney, Ok thanks Dr Salvus 15:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. At the English-language Wikipedia, we try to use English for all comments. Posting all comments in English makes it easier for other editors to join the conversation and help you. If you cannot avoid using another language, then please provide a translation into English, if you can. If you cannot provide a translation, please go to the list of Wikipedias, look in the list for a Wikipedia that is in your language, and edit there instead of here. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:38, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

ToBeFree, OK, I thought WP: ENGLISHPLEASE doesn't applies in the user talks Dr Salvus 10:40, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

No worries :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:42, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

ToBeFree, Unfortunately, I am not a native speaker. Can I speak in Italian or French if I then insert the English translation? Dr Salvus 10:54, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker either :) The best way to learn the language is to actually use it – but of course you're welcome to write messages in two languages. The main idea is that other editors can read the messages. If there's an English translation, that's perfectly fine. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Monica Casiraghi

Hi! Good luck with your exams. When you're back, I wondered if you might take a look at Monica Casiraghi if you have a chance, even though I know your focus is soccer. I'm working on articles about women 100KM world champions and there's a lot out there in Italian. Unfortunately, my Italian is rudimentary, at best. Thanks either way! Star Mississippi 15:48, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Star Mississippi, I'll try to help you. Maybe even today since my exam is on 14 June (not tomorrow). I didn't know you can speak Italian Dr Salvus 16:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Molto grazie (including the translation of "thank you" per the earlier thread). I can read it better than I can speak it, but I can say essentials like "i biscotti al cioccolato sono i miei" (The chocolate cookies are mine), which a friend taught me because I'm a chocoholic. Thanks so much for what you added, didn't realize she was a multi champion. Where I left it was enough for GNG but you just helped on the sports side as well. Thank you! Star Mississippi 16:48, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Star Mississippi, Italian grammar is one of the most difficult in the world. Even I, who am Italian, make mistakes! For example, Italian has six definite articles (English only one) or has twenty-four possessive adjectives (English has five). Let's change the subject: What did you think of my behaviour in March and early April? What punitive measure would you have wanted to take? Did I change your mind? if you have articles to improve about Italy or Italians, I'm here to help you :) Dr Salvus 17:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

I think you have made amazing progress, Dr Salvus. I think my primary issue was that you seemed to want to move forward with what you thought the answer was, regardless of whether there was information you were missing. You've had more discussions about sourcing and I think you have a better idea for why the English wikipedia might be more complicated than you expected. That's to be expected of a new user, but you paused and listened, which is a big part of why you weren't blocked. You're growing as a user, which is commendable. I will never learn the possessives. I figure if I travel to Italy again and can communicate with vocabulary, no one will judge my ocassional: mine cookies, which will inevitably happen. :) Will let you know if any other Italian articles cross my list, I am making a small dent in the 100KM winners as it was disappointing there aren't more articles. Star Mississippi 18:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Star Mississippi, Italian possessives are: mio, mia, miei, mie, tuo, tua, tuoi, tue, suo, sua, suoi, sue, nostro, nostra, nostri, nostre, vostro, vostra, vostri, vostre, il loro, la loro, le loro (they are 23, not 24). I hope you didn't get a headache reading these possessives. I must admit that I deserved at least a block in the foreground content. I was surprised that I did not receive any kind of sanction. The WP:ANI discussion and this message made me change the way I approach Wikipedia. Dr Salvus 19:50, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

The most important thing is, you stopped and heard the feedback. I'm glad you did as I think you're a huge asset to the project and will continue to be one as you get more experience (true for all of us). Star Mississippi 20:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Block request

Please see WP:SELFBLOCK - rather than blocking you, consider adding Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/WikiBreak Enforcer instead, which will prevent you logging in until your exams have passed. GiantSnowman 08:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, it doesn't work well Dr Salvus 13:25, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Have you installed the script? GiantSnowman 13:35, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, yes of course. See here Dr Salvus 13:36, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Well you probably haven't installed it properly. Ask for help from the whizzes at WP:VPT. GiantSnowman 13:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

GiantSnowman,  Done Thanks for your help Dr Salvus 13:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Please be more careful in reverts and edit summaries

Hi. You reverted two edits at Gianluigi Buffon, with the edit summary "Both edit were nonsense". The first edit[2] wasn't vandalism, but a reflection of recent announcements like this one, the second one simply introduced a helpful and correct link[3]. Even if the link perhaps wasn't needed (e.g. if it was already linked above), it surely wasn't "nonsense" and shouldn't have been reverted like this, per WP:BITE. Fram (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Fram, I did not say those edits were vandalism. Buffon has not yet been made official as Parma's new goalkeeper. Maybe I wasn't familiar with the meaning of the word "nonsense" since I don't have English as a first language. Anyway those edits were wrong Dr Salvus 16:36, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Giampiero Boniperti

On 19 June 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Giampiero Boniperti, 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. PFHLai (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Thanks :) Dr Salvus 15:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy birthday Doc! Star Mississippi 19:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

copy/paste talk page archiving

Hi Dr Salvus,

I'm not aware of there being any rules regarding this, but when you copy/paste sections in your talk page archives, as you did here, it causes all the pings in the text to be notified again. I got three from that edit alone. Better to let the archive bot deal with archiving? Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 07:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Gricehead Thank you. I didn't know this fact Dr Salvus 08:53, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Codogné

Hi. When you added your support at the RM with this edit, you accidentally deleted the whole discussion. I've restored it, but you'll have to re-add your vote. Lennart97 (talk) 23:22, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Lennart97,  Done Dr Salvus 23:24, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Wikipediæ philosophia:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1400 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

preliminary round

Hi. What makes you think preliminary should have a capital P in 2021–22 Coupe de France preliminary rounds? Please quote a MOS page or revert, thanks. Also, you've broken all the links between pages with your move. Gricehead (talk) 21:17, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Gricehead, my bad... At this point we should change title also for other pages on coupe de france preliminary rounds. Thogh, I do think that these edits should be made by a page mover/admin (redirects'd be problematic) Dr Salvus 21:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

(your ping didn't work, but I'm now watching this page). There are no redirects to either 2021–22 Coupe de France Preliminary rounds or 2021–22 Coupe de France Preliminary rounds, Overseas departments and territories from the correct articles name, so there should be no issues moving those two articles back. If you want to move previous season articles to the same naming convention, I don't have an issue with that. Gricehead (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

About the request for a reliable source on the A.S. Roma 2021-22 Season page

Hello there, I have received your message asking for a reference after I included the referee in the friendly details. While I have done as asked, it is not common and rarely seen (if ever) to have a reference next to the referee's name. I would like to re-edit it and remove the reference all together because the official match report from the Roma website was published. What is your take on this?

Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8A0:5D3E:500:94AA:CE1F:5624:CE58 (talk • contribs)

2001:8A0:5D3E:500:94AA:CE1F:5624:CE58, you can add the source in the report. This'd be the source of the match. We do prefer add the source there. Dr Salvus (talk) 17:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Gloria Marinelli

Hi! I've created a page for Marinelli. I was going to do the same for Valeria Pirone but I couldn't find a reliable source for her caps for Italy. According to Italian Wikipedia, she has 11 caps but I couldn't verify this anywhere. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Spiderone, thanks for creating Marinelli's page. Calcio.com (a reliable source) says that she has one cap (see here). Maybe, you can use the aforementioned source for creating the article. She'd meet WP:NFOOTY anyway Dr Salvus 19:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I've done a very basic stub for Pirone. Hopefully it will get expanded at some point. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:12, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

2021–22 Coppa Italia Serie C

Hi Salvo, have you already prepared the article of 2021–22 Coppa Italia Serie C? Because I've meant to work on it--Andyen94 (talk) 17:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Andyen94, not yet. I will create it today or tomorrow. Thanks for your interest to the article Dr Salvus 17:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Category:2020s in Cesena has been nominated for deletion

Category:2020s in Cesena has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DemonStalker (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Hello, Dr Salvus,

Please do not tag a page for deletion before an AFD discussion has been closed. This was premature, even if it looks like deletion will be the final decision. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Liz, thank you. I was unaware of this fact Dr Salvus 09:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Coppa Italia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francesco Orlando.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Coppa Italia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diego Peralta.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Italy national football team - disruptive editing and removal of information

You disruptive editing and removal of information has been reported on the talk page. Why did you removed the indication of players withdrew due to injury?--Bergenoslo (talk) 17:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Bergenoslo, as Nehme1499 said your edits fail WP:RECENTISM Dr Salvus 17:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

I did it and I also reported your behaviour. If the information that you removed is a WP:RECENTISM, you should removed it on ALL the national football team pages on Wikipedia. Why don't you do it Dr Salvus?--Bergenoslo (talk) 18:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Bergenoslo, I'm not very interested in national teams pages. I undid your edits beacuse I've this page in my watchlist Dr Salvus 18:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

So you don't even know why you removed information and you have no valid argument to justify your removal of information. Your unfair behavior has been reported.--Bergenoslo (talk) 18:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Bergenoslo, can you provide an example on another page of a national team where an injury was reported please? Dr Salvus 18:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Check the French or German national football teams pages for an example, but as I said the indication of injured players among the recently called players is normal and present on the Wikipedia pages of each national football team.--Bergenoslo (talk) 18:29, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

As Nehme1499 said, there is a consensus on WT:FOOTY who says that injuries should not be reported. However I do not want that an admin blocks you and open a discussion on WP:ANI about me and him is funny Dr Salvus 18:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Milan

The consensus I see is Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_145#A.C._Milan,_AC_Milan,_Milan Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:18, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

And summarized at WP:ACMILAN. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

2021–22 Coppa Italia Serie D

Hi Salvo, if you want you can create the page. I'll add fixtures as for 2021–22 Coppa Italia Serie C Andyen94 (talk) 10:14, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

, I've just started it in my sandbox adding the fixtures of the preliminary rounds Dr Salvus 12:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Dr Salvus May I suggest you to use the names of teams I've used in 2021–22 Serie D? Andyen94 (talk) 12:45, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

, yes you're right. I will use them Dr Salvus 12:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Andyen94, I've just created the page Dr Salvus 21:26, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Juventus F.C. Under-23 season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stadio Silvio Piola.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Alessandro Del Piero

For retired players, it is standard practice to include club totals in the infobox where the player played for more than one club. See Carlo Ancelotti, David Beckham and Johan Cruyff as a few random examples. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 22:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah ok. This is reason I don't see total goals and apps in pages like Juventus' current players Dr Salvus 22:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

CVUA

Hello! I was wondering, do you want to continue with CVUA? Apologies for the delay, it's been a busy few months for me. Best, Vermont (talk) 23:49, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Vermont, Yes, I do. However I may do some delays due to my busyness Dr Salvus 03:04, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

heeey. Just saying. Have I actually done 7 edits? Do edits in talk pages and stuff actually count? Crunchy Cloaky Crackdown (talk) 20:33, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, they do. With 10 edit you'll be an auto confirmed and therefore you'll be able to create pages or edit some protected pages Dr Salvus 20:54, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Juventus F.C. Under-23 season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paulo Henrique.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Question for administrator

Today I've noticed that my IP address was blocked on 23 August and the block is still active. I had never had a problem with editing before a few days ago but I managed to solve the problem by changing the profile passworld (I had received an email saying that someone had requested a reset of my passworld). Today this problem has repeated but I haven't received any email saying that someone had changed the passworld. At the moment I can only send mail and use my talk page. What can I do to get back to editing? --Dr Salvus 19:23, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Hi @Dr Salvus, this is normal behavior if your IP address has been blocked as typically you can only edit your talk page and send emails when you or your IP address is blocked. You can log out and appeal the block, or [[follow the instructions at WP:IPBLOCK to add a flag to your account that will circumvent IP blocks on your account. Hope this helps. ✨ Ed talk! ✨ 23:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

• WP:UTRS is one option, as you may need to provide some information that you don't want to divulge in public, like your IP /location / email. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't unblock the IP because I don't know which IP you are using. This is why it is better to just use the ticket system. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:26, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  @Ed6767 and @Dennis Brown OK. I'll make a request at UTRS Dr Salvus 23:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  • • Excellent. Not sure what the solution is, but UTRS is via email and everything is private, just the best way. They should be able to find a solution pretty quick. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:32, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
      • I've granted WP:IPBE for one month, which I think should cover it. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

        Zzuuzz, Thanks. Now I can edit Dr Salvus 23:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

January 2022

Your recent editing history at Juventus F.C. (women) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cozy1298 (talk • contribs) 10:22, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I've arleady replied to your treath at WT:FOOTY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cozy1298 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Cozy1298. Ok, now we have to wait for a consensus and only then you can undo my edits Dr Salvus 10:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Juventus F.C. (women)

See my response at FOOTY. GiantSnowman 16:06, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Re: FLC tack page question

Re this: From what I know, yeah. But, the instructions say: "Nominators should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed." But what constitutes in gaining a "substantial support" is bit unclear. If I am not wrong, it means at-least 2 supports with no outstanding oppose, and reasonable time has passed. Perhaps, a coordinator could confirm this. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kavyansh.Singh thanks for your reply. I had though it would've been a stuipid question. @FLC director and delegates: do you confirm what he's said? I'm asking so as I've got this pending FL nomination and I'd like to nominate this article. Dr Salvus 20:34, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, the rule isn't explicit, but I'd say two substantial reviews, no opposes, and a while has passed sounds about right. In any case, yes, I think you're good to go for a second nomination. --PresN 21:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

PresN, thanks. Wouldn't it be better specify it in the FLC rules? Dr Salvus 21:23, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

It is specifically vague. I would suggest pinging a co-ord before nominating a second. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Lee Vilenski, what's a "co-ord"? Dr Salvus 21:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Pretty sure he means a director or delegates, co-ord (or co-ordinator) is used in other projects for the same role. In any case, yeah, it's vague on purpose- we don't want people vote-counting (because it's not up to the nominators to determine what counts as a "substantial" review), and we do want people to ask, especially if it's not a series of similar lists. It's the same thought process behind why you won't find an explicit rule about when a nomination is ready to promote, even though the pattern is pretty easy to discern: because promoting a list is about more than just counting "support" words and rubber-stamping it, and we don't want nominators to get the impression that they just need to get the right number of magic words. --PresN 01:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of List of Italy national football team hat-tricks

Congratulations, Dr Salvus! The list you nominated, List of Italy national football team hat-tricks, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:28, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Dejan Kulusevski

 Done GiantSnowman 11:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, please do the same also at Federico Gatti for the same reason Dr Salvus 21:58, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

yes, have done that as well. GiantSnowman 10:07, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, thanks. Please have a look also to Denis Zakaria for the same reason Dr Salvus 10:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done GiantSnowman 10:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Federico Gatti

I'm afraid I don't do a lot with images - but if you need assistance WP:GID should help. GiantSnowman 20:32, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Croatian IP

Great, thanks. GiantSnowman 09:23, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Suppressed edits

Hi, Dr Salvus, I have unfortunately had to suppress some of your edits because they reveal too much personally identifiable information about you. We have a policy of protecting editors' safety by hiding such information if they share it. I'm really sorry about having to suppress your edits, and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add the information. For some useful information on privacy and safety, you can take a look at Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors and Wikipedia:On privacy, confidentiality and discretion. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages! -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

LuK3, You're right. I'd sinned of naivety Dr Salvus 17:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Dr Salvus - let us know if anything else needs removing. GiantSnowman 09:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, you haven't done what I've said in the email. I still see the thing I've asked you to remove... Dr Salvus 10:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

I cannot remove the edit summary because the edit itself has been suppressed. @LuK3: can you asisst please? GiantSnowman 10:28, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Cristian Volpato

If you cannot verify the information, feel free to revert it. I will leave the user a message. GiantSnowman 10:55, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Calcio.com

Template:Calcio.com has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federico Gatti

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Federico Gatti 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 Legobot, on behalf of ArsenalGhanaPartey -- ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 16:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of List of international goals scored by Gigi Riva

Congratulations, Dr Salvus! The list you nominated, List of international goals scored by Gigi Riva, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Warlocked

You didn't close the GAN. GamerPro64 16:34, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

GamerPro64,  Done Dr Salvus 18:46, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
3,927		Paul Pogba (talk)	Add sources
296		International availability of McDonald's products (talk)	Add sources
6		Ferruccio Novo (talk)	Add sources
55		Artemio Franchi (talk)	Add sources
1,581		Revolutions of 1989 (talk)	Add sources
87		Antonio Percassi (talk)	Add sources
61		Juventus F.C. Youth Sector (talk)	Cleanup
61		Antonio Nocerino (talk)	Cleanup
509		Leon Goretzka (talk)	Cleanup
1,872		Fossil fuel (talk)	Expand
277		Alex Sandro (talk)	Expand
101		Coin problem (talk)	Expand
155		Somali cat (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
50		Regional street food (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
33		2021 in Italy (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
704		COVID-19 pandemic in Italy (talk)	Merge
1,937		Canola oil (talk)	Merge
14		Partially ordered group (talk)	Merge
376		Nicolás Tagliafico (talk)	Wikify
737		History of McDonald's (talk)	Wikify
100		Mattia Destro (talk)	Wikify
4		Andrea Masetti (talk)	Orphan
2		Abubakar Suleymanov (talk)	Orphan
2		Diego Di Cecco (talk)	Orphan
148		Owen Otasowie (talk)	Stub
11		Alessandro Di Pardo (talk)	Stub
101		Samuel Iling-Junior (talk)	Stub
11		Mattia Del Favero (talk)	Stub
64		Félix Correia (talk)	Stub
26		Simulated pregnancy (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federico Gatti

The article Federico Gatti you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Federico Gatti for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ArsenalGhanaPartey -- ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 14:21, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Gatti GAN

I have put back GA1 in both Talk:Federico Gatti and Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Articles currently under a review, as GA1 still isn't formally closed. Manually changing to GA2 messes with the bot edits at WP:GAN. I have asked at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Federico Gatti what should be done. Hopefully someone clarifies the correct procedure. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 10:53, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Nehme1499 thanks for this :) But couldn't you do the review if there were further problems? Dr Salvus 11:28, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

I could, and I had actually considered it. However, my problem is that he is still too young, and his career is relatively short. I don't feel very comfortable promoting this article given these circumstances. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:36, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

@Nehme1499, hi again. Vaselineeeeeeee has corrected my donkey errors (redacted). In your opinion, could the article be ready for a second GAN? Is the article neutral enough? I've done the changes somebody has suggested today to make this better. I don't want to fail another time, I'm asking for second opinion prior to nominate. Dr Salvus 18:54, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

My real problem with the article isn't the grammar or the content. It's the fact that the player will have a long career ahead of him, so the article will change a lot in the future. I'd prefer to review a footballer who has either already retired, or is close to retiring. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 18:04, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Template:Royal Belgian Football Association player

Hi, how are you?

I've changed the category naming convention in this template you created, and I've also nominated the previous cat I've created for renaming to match this new criteria. Just giving you a heads up to avoid some possible duplicates :)

Cheers, BRDude⁷⁰ (talk) 23:29, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@BrazilianDude70 thanks. :) Dr Salvus 23:30, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Second anniversary on Wikipedia

Happy First Edit Day, Dr Salvus, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 14:34, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Dr Salvus. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 14:11, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Pep Guardiola GA Review

Hello Dr Salvus,

Do you have any further comments on this review? You haven't edited in approximately 3 weeks. If you no longer have the will to do so, please feel free to withdraw the review. If you do, I'd prefer you give me some suggestions on improvements to make to the article. I'd greatly appreciate a swift response. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 17:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@ArsenalGhanaPartey ah sorry. I thought you'd no longer been active. Today or tomorrow, I'll see it again. Dr Salvus 17:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

No problem. I'm active, its just my activity has decreased this month. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

ArsenalGhanaPartey, ok. When you can, I ask you to see Gatti's second nomination. Dr Salvus 20:46, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@ArsenalGhanaPartey Haven't been able to see the article today due to my tiredness. Hope to be able to see it this weekend. Dr Salvus 22:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Juventus F.C. Under-23 season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stadio Silvio Piola.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

User pages and WP:BLP

Hey, I'm not sure whether User:Dr Salvus#Reasons I believe Massimiliano Allegri is the worst coach you'll ever see is actually a BLP violation or not - and I don't claim to be an expert in the area - but if it was me I would remove it just to be safe. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 20:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

@Gricehead Good idea. I don't like this coach at all but I may have exaggerated (I feel bad when I think he signed a four-year contract last year). I'll email the OS team. Just out for curiosty: did you ask to oversight my sensitive info in February from my user page? If so, I thank you. Dr Salvus 21:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

No, that wasn't me. Always better to be safe than sorry :) Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 21:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Oversighter here. This doesn't qualify for oversight, but I'd recommend removing it from the user page, as it's a borderline BLP issue. Keep in mind that, when seeking additional permissions, the first stop of the granting administrator is your userpage and your contributions. This won't help you. If you wish, I can revdelete this from your page history once it's reverted; any user can request the partial or complete deletion of edits to their userpage. Risker (talk) 02:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Risker, you've said it's a "borderline issue", so not really is it, why would you say it's a problem when asking permissions? I'm not the only one who does dislike Allegri and the Allegriani (in Italy, it's the name we use for those who always defend him even when he's totally wrong) but if you reccomend to hide them, then do it. Dr Salvus 05:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I believe what Risker is saying (and she can correct me if I'm wrong) but inflammatory statements on one's user page, regardless of whether they are an RD2-worthy offense, tend to make people concerned at venues such as WP:PERM and WP:RFA. The most recent RFA almost had this issue, but this one as well was derailed by a user page comment that couldn't be walked back. Obviously these two examples are not the same as yours, but as I said I'm mostly explaining where I feel Risker is coming from. Primefac (talk) 07:36, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Risker and Primefac I may have misunderstood but why do you believe people will be concerned to PERMs and at RFAs? I haven't written any insult or defamatory attack, just a critic to a "coach" who's worsening my favourite team, which wouldn't violate RD2. However, as I've been suggested to ask to hide, then suppress the edits. Dr Salvus 08:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I think in trying to help I made it worse. I don't know where you got the idea about oversight in the first place, to be honest, as the OP was simply asking you whether that section was a BLP violation. Risker gave some further thoughts about why it might be a good idea to remove that section, and I elaborated on her comment. As we have now established, it is not a BLP violation, so whether you keep or remove the section is entirely up to you. Primefac (talk) 08:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac I must've got it wrong. It would really make no sense hiding it (but not oversighting) as every admin is able to see such edits and only admins can give permissions. If it's not a BLP violation, then why will this lead me to troubles when I request for adminship someday? Dr Salvus 09:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Risker said it, not me. Wait for her reply. Primefac (talk) 10:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Risker can you explain the reason you say so? Dr Salvus 11:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dr Salvus. I thought pretty hard about whether or not to revision-delete the content involved. If the request had come from the subject, I probably would have done so; however, since this page isn't generally available under a google search for the subject's name +Wikipedia, the impact of the negative commentary on the subject is minimal. The impact on your own reputation, by using your userpage to make negative commentary about a public figure, may result in some administrators and fellow editors to have a negative impression about you. The admins who spend more time granting additional permissions tend to look pretty closely at editing behaviour; not just that relevant to the permission request being made, but overall. I see that you've now removed the content involved from your page. As noted, any user can request that any edits they have made to their userspace be deleted, without reason given. I'd be happy to revision-delete that content under the edit summary "user request" if you wish. Ping me if you would like this. Risker (talk) 06:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Risker, ok do it Dr Salvus 06:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Done. Risker (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Risker, also remove the edit summary of the last of the two edits. Dr Salvus 19:09, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Looks like Primefac cleaned up after me. Risker (talk) 20:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

@Risker the reason of this is that I'd subsequently emailed the oversighters having seen you're not very active Dr Salvus 20:14, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

No worries. I'm actually very active, just not visibly on this project at the same time as you are. The ping you send with this was the 32nd Wiki-related email I've followed up on today. Risker (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Fabio Miretti

Hi. What's the problem...? Danyele (talk) 14:53, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Danyele, Had forgot to write there shouldn't be that photo in that template because he's not shown. I've left an invisible note, so anyone will be able to understand so. Dr Salvus 14:56, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Can't we put a cropped photo in the box, but can we put the original version in the page instead? Bah... I'll comply, but I don't understand. Danyele (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@Danyele the box needs a picture which shows his face, while almost every other photo which shows his body his fine in the original version of the page is fine. There shouldn't be this photo in the other pages either. Dr Salvus 15:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Wikipediæ philosophia,

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)

Why are you Reviewing my sandbox?

Why are you reviewing a page in my sandbox? I didn't think sandboxes came under the scope of WP:NPP? I've reverted your edit because (again) it showed a misunderstanding of the English language being used. Regards, Gricehead (talk) 21:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

@Gricehead prior to be an auto confirmed, my sandboxes had often got reviewed and I had often seen NPPs making such reviews. I can't say I wasn't wrong with making that edit, but can you explain the reason it's wrong, so that I won't make the mistake anymore? If you've noticed any other mistake I often make, please let me know. Dr Salvus 21:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

You tried to join two completely unrelated sentences by changing the plural noun "tiers" to the determinative pronoun "which". I can't understand how that would make sense in any context, and I'm not sure you should be trying to make grammatical corrections on en-wiki if you can't see it, as it's not healthy for the project. Gricehead (talk) 22:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Gricehead, You're right. I wish I wasn't (that would be a mistake, which is made by everyone) so arrogant... Unfortunately, the very bad way English is taught in Italy at school is also to blame and I can't even understand what being said in songs without lyrics or in films with no subtitles... Dr Salvus 22:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

In retrospect, I was maybe a little harsh. Sorry for that. Your English is undoubtedly better than my Italian. But that's why I don't edit it-wiki. I generally only edit en-wiki, despite competence in French and Portuguese (where I think I have a handful of edits between the native wikis) Gricehead (talk) 09:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Gricehead, there are many reasons for which I preferred editing here rather than on itwiki. For example, here I can care about Juventus U23 players, but on itwiki these players are hardly ever notable. I have a big interest in Coupe de France (and in FA Cup) but I wouldn't be able to do a lot there as much content isn't notable enough. But in primis, I decided to edit here to improve my English which was rubbish, and that helped me a lot, much more than what schools or Cambridge English lessons can offer (I'm currently doing a B1 course and I'm going to have an exam in June/July).

Didn't know you spoke Italian, how long have you been studying this language and how much is it difficult? Dr Salvus 10:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 Juventus F.C. (women) season, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vinci and Juventus Training Center.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Orphan CdF Preliminary regional articles

Hi, you've tagged a bunch of CdF preliminary regional articles as orphans today (presumably using an AWB setting or a default). None of them are orphans, as can be proven simply by checking "what links here" on the article. Each one is linked to from at least one place (usually the main article for that seasons CdF preliminary round. Can you check these please, and revert where appropriate? Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 20:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gricehead Sorry f0r messing up. I'll fix. Dr Salvus 20:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

I've cleant it up further, making another mess. I'll fix manually today or tomorrow, but I won't be using AWB this time... Dr Salvus 20:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Wishing Dr Salvus a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee!   Chris Troutman (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello Wikipediæ philosophia,

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: 13810 articles, as of 18:00, 3 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

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

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, 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. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. 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.

(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Federico Gatti

@Baffle gab1978, thanks. Can you also do a Ga review, I nominated it in April. Dr Salvus 14:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

No problem. No, I won't do a GA review; I'm not an experienced GA reviewer. It also would be improper of me to review an article I've just copy-edited. I think it would pass a GA review though, it seems to meet the requirements. Good luck and cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:07, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Source for Ramsey lefting Juve

Here you are: https://www.tuttomercatoweb.com/serie-a/ufficiale-juventus-finisce-l-avventura-di-ramsey-e-risoluzione-consensuale-del-contratto-1710233

Acceptable for you ?

~~~~ Riktetta (talk) 16:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federico Gatti

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Federico Gatti 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fabio Miretti

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fabio Miretti 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:02, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federico Gatti

The article Federico Gatti you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Federico Gatti for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:02, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fabio Miretti

The article Fabio Miretti you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Fabio Miretti for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Federico Gatti

The article Federico Gatti you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Federico Gatti for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fabio Miretti

The article Fabio Miretti you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fabio Miretti for comments about the article. 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 Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:42, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Fabio Miretti

Hello! Your submission of Fabio Miretti at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cielquiparle (talk) 23:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello again. I was wondering if you could please add the new "standing ovation" citation to the actual article page? Then I will be able to quickly approve this DYK hook. Thank you! Cielquiparle (talk) 08:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Cielquiparle  Done Dr Salvus 09:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022

New Page Review queue August 2022

Hello Wikipediæ philosophia,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF

The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject

Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers

The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

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.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Rabiot infobox

I'm sorry, but I've undone your edits to his infobox. I see no reason why it wasn't already accurate and consistent with how loan spells are usually dealt with in the infobox. He never had two spells as a PSG B player because he remained contractually a PSG player during the loan at Toulouse. Stuart1234 (talk) 20:45, 8 August 2022 (UTC)