User talk:APerson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for User:APerson:

Bug in afdstats[edit]

Hi, you're listed as one of the maintainers here: [1] for the afdstats tool. There's a bug with it and it's unable to find the greyscale.css stylesheet. On this page [2] It's attempting to load it from here: [3] when the css file is actually located here [4]. Could you please fix this if you have time? I find the tool useful for keeping track of AfDs I've been involved in. ― Padenton|   00:49, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Padenton, since my PuTTY config is down briefly (read: can't connect to labs at the moment) and since I won't be around for the next few days, you probably want to try one of the other two maintainers of the tool. Sorry! APerson (talk!) 02:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

RfC: New helper policy[edit]

Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".

To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 00:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Cite isbn[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Cite isbn. Legobot (talk) 00:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done APerson (talk!) 22:54, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

WT:AFCH script problems.[edit]

It seems that AFCH is no longer leaving decline notices on a users talk page when you decline it using the tool. I saw that you where a mantainer of the tool and wanted to bring the problem to your attention. A bug report was posted here. Thanks, TheMesquitobuzz 17:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Already fixed by Theopolisme. APerson (talk!) 22:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for inviting me to the Teahouse back in January. I'm new to Wikipedia 5 months and 744 edits. I'm keen on helping with reviewing articles. I want to know what is the process. Thanks. Adyoo3 (talk) 05:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Adyoo3, it's awesome that you want to help out! First, make sure that you understand what sorts of articles belong on Wikipedia; lots of stuff has been written about the topic, but a great place to start would be the notability guideline. We have some instructions for reviewing articles, and after you've carefully read those and are confident that you understand the process there, you can add yourself to the list of reviewers. After you've added yourself, you'll be able to use the helper script, which makes reviewing a lot easier. Finally, pending submissions live at the pending submissions category, and you can find some to review there.
At first, you may want to stick to articles you are very, very confident about, such as submissions that are obviously attack pages or pages about people who obviously aren't notable (e.g. pages whose only content is "Foo Bar is the most awesome person ever!!!!"). Those can be most commonly found in the category of very new submissions, since easy reviews happen very fast.
Above all, be careful! For most of the people whose submissions you're reviewing, it's their first experience writing an article here. The experience they have often determines whether they'll come back and add more content or whether they'll leave Wikipedia, never to return.
If you have any questions about anything, feel free to ask me or another reviewer. Or, for questions specifically about reviewing, try the talk page set up for this purpose; for questions about the process, try the talk page of the project that runs all this.
Thank you again for offering to help out, and good luck reviewing! APerson (talk!) 19:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 May newsletter[edit]

C/2014 Q2 (Lovejoy) is a long-period comet discovered on 17 August 2014 by Terry Lovejoy; and is one of several Featured Pictures worked up by India The Herald (submissions) during the second round.

The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Belarus Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.

Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Some code[edit]

I saw, late, that you've been doing a few trial runs on the bot vis-a-vis the featured content importer for the Signpost. Me and Dispenser did some work on this problem as well but we have trouble with the script when it comes to dealing with encoding. Still, the source code may be of use to you. Before checking your bots on a whim I wasn't aware you were actively working on this problem in parallel!

I spent several hours last week downloading and (mostly) setting up pywikibot. ResMar 04:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Persondata RfC[edit]

Hi, You participated in the previous Persondata RfC. I just wanted to notify you that a new RfC regarding the methodical removal of Persondata is taking place at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Thanks, —Msmarmalade (talk) 07:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Commented there APerson (talk!) 05:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:TransAsia Airways Flight 235[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:TransAsia Airways Flight 235. Legobot (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done, navbox inclusion discussion ≠ technical discussion. APerson (talk!) 05:55, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done: again, navbox inclusion ≠ a technical issue. APerson (talk!) 05:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Help with reviewing[edit]

I'm reviewing my first article, I need a second opinion. This is the draft

I want to decline it as I found this subject at these links And But want to suggest the author to improve on the former link as it needs citations.

What happens when I hit Decline and should I put a comment on why it was declined(what does it mean use Wikicode syntax?)

Thanks.Adyoo3 (talk) 09:40, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Adyoo3, when you hit "Decline", the script marks the draft as having been declined, signalling to the person who wrote the draft that improvement is needed before the draft can become an article. It also leaves a note on the user's talk page that the draft was declined. Regarding the comment, the stuff you write in the box will become a comment under the declined box on the draft. "Use wikicode syntax" just means that you can use plain old MediaWiki markup (i.e. make links with [[Foo]]) inside that box.
I get what you're saying about how the subject of the draft is already covered by other Wikipedia articles. What reviewers should consider here is whether Wikipedia would be better served by having an article on this sort-of-separate topic, the method biologists use to check when a group of organisms represents a new species. The draft includes quite a bit of new content, so I would think a little bit more about whether the information here can be just merged into those other two articles.
In the end, it's your call about whether the article should be created. Have fun reviewing! APerson (talk!) 00:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 00:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Already done APerson (talk!) 00:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Reviewing my second article[edit]

Thanks for your earlier advice, I have declined my first article but gave the same advice to the author about merging articles or considering writing a more comprehensive article. For my second article for review I need a second opinion. I want to accept an article. But I find myself doing a lot editing. Should I decline it and ask the author to make corrections and edits instead?

I have edited the Introduction and Early Life section of this well cited and researched article to sound more like an encyclopedia entry>

The Community Out Reach section is very comprehensive, should it be cut down since the dog's website has a lot of the facts stated here. The Merchandising section sounds like an advertisement. I think the citations should not lead to or places books are sold but instead to articles about the book, am I correct?

In general, I think there are too many citations. The author references the dog's website, YouTube or news videos. Should I remove entries like the Marmaduke movie sentence as the only citation is at the dog's website? How would you rewrite the Media Apperance section.

I think Notoriety & Recognition can be combined. The External links can be cut down too.

Thank you Adyoo3 (talk) 08:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Adyoo3, quick note about the citations: too many citations isn't a problem, but citations have to be to reliable sources. YouTube, as a self-published source, generally doesn't count as reliable. The tone of the article, especially the "Early Life" section, diverges way too much from the expected tone of an article, so I would have declined the article for that. WP:TONE and WP:NPOV are a guideline and a policy (respectively) about what such an "expected tone" is. APerson (talk!) 18:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)


I notice this message AFCH error: user not listed and checked the list my name was gone. I put my name again but I cannot get the reviewers script to work again. I wonder what happened? Was I removed from the list for some reason, I didn't get any messages as such. Adyoo3 (talk) 16:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks like Sminthopsis84 took you off the list, with the edit summary "Still hasn't been editing articles." As you clearly have over 500 mainspace edits, I've re-added you, and you should be able to review again. I'll just wait for Sminthopsis84 to comment here. Meanwhile, keep up the good work! I've been looking through your reviews, and a lot of them are pretty good. A few things to watch:
  • Draft:Net neutrality in Singapore was marked as non-notable web content, but that's the reason for articles about websites and other things that are on the web, not just things that are related to the web.
  • Draft:Lumicrine - watch the reason you're using again; here, the issue may be less with the tone than with the demonstrated notability of the article.
In general, when giving a policy as a reason for something, such as "WP:N", try to make it a wikilink to the policy so those less familiar with all of the arcane abbreviations used here can click through to the policy. Finally, again, as you're getting started, try to concentrate your reviewing on the drafts that are obviously quick declines. Thanks! APerson (talk!) 16:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps I was too hasty. I used the previous removal which Adyoo3 reversed, saw that the date was May 10th, that there had been no article edits since then. I have not been able to access the edit-count tool, so cannot be certain. Backing off now. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on MediaWiki talk:Tag-OneClickArchiver[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on MediaWiki talk:Tag-OneClickArchiver. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Cannot Review[edit]

Hi, I still can't review. I see my name on the list though. In the meantime I've been looking over pending AFCs and advising authors. ThanksAdyoo3 (talk) 01:35, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah - it looks like your name was written as "adyoo3" instead of "Adyoo3". Just fixed that; you should be able to review now. APerson (talk!) 13:14, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for your willingness to help out. I have not the first idea how to run the bot, so thank you! Let me know if you need any questions answered but hopefully it's self-explanatory.Fisherjs (talk) 00:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

To decline or not that is the question[edit]

Hi, I've been reviewing AFCs I took your advise and looked for articles that are obviously not notable. An observation. I notice one person keeps leaving comments rather than making a decision to decline articles. I've found over 30 such entries. I think the person has enough experience since they joined in 2012 to review well. Most time authors do not correct their articles, maybe they didn't receive the comment? It seems a waste of time having to come behind a reviewer, read the article, especially when the comment says to research the citations. Just want to make sure the AFC pending articles doesn't backlog. Here is an example..

Thank you. Adyoo3 (talk) 01:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Adyoo3, if reviewers don't want to make a definite decision about accepting or declining an article (for instance, if they're unsure about the decision, or someone with the right permissions is needed to create a page over a redirect or something), they will often leave a comment instead. I don't really see a problem with that; I've done it a few times myself. The comments left in this way are helpful to both the author of the draft as well as to future reviewers. The helper script has an option to notify drafts' authors when you're leaving a comment, and it looks like this option was used in the case you pointed to. TL;DR: no problem. APerson (talk!) 18:47, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Template:Infobox beach[edit]

On 6 March 2015 you moved code to {{Infobox beach}}. Are you aware that the template is essentially same as the 23 March 2012 revision of {{Infobox protected area}}, only with some very minor differences?[5] Even the documentation is that of IPA. --AussieLegend () 17:01, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

AussieLegend, no, I didn't check whether the template was a duplicate. Pinging Peaceray, who created the template. Maybe it would be better just to move it back to his sandbox? APerson (talk!) 18:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
That's probably best. In its present form it's TfD fodder. It should probably be rebuilt from scratch as it doesn't serve any useful purpose. --AussieLegend () 18:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, please put it back in my sandbox; it was nowhere near primetime. Peaceray (talk)
Looks like it's been Yes check.svg Done by Huon. APerson (talk!) 00:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done APerson (talk!) 19:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


Removal from AfC Participants[edit] I'm very sorry for having to do this, but I'm afraid you don't yet seem to have a good grasp of policy or the ability to communicate well with newcomers. AfC is a very important process for the English language Wikipedia, and I have received several complaints of confusing and inaccurate comments left on drafts by you. I really appreciate your contributions, but perhaps it is best for you to come back when you are more experienced and have gotten more of your own drafts through AfC as well. Again, I apologize, and please come back in the future, but you do not seem to have the necessary experience and grasp of Wikipedia policy at this time. Thank you for your understanding. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly why I am denied reviewing articles, how many complains did I get. I am aware of the policies. I have had interactions with authors that have been fruitful. I have left comments with out declining articles. I took the advice of peers about finding AFC pending articles that can be declined right away. I've approve good articles. I have worked hard on submitting my own articles. Am I suppose to comment on submissions before making a choice to accept or decline? If I can't review, is it okay for me to help authors by editing their articles and advising them? I've real world experience as a writer on a newspaper, about 1000 edits and nearly 6 months of edits, English is my first language. I've asked for someone to come behind me to aid in my decisions. Is it possible I get a mentor? Can I be on probation? Did I review too many articles a day. I admit I am excited to help with Wilipedia, perhaps too enthusiastic

Adyoo3 (talk) 20:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Adyoo3, it looks like you ran into one of the most important things to notice about Articles for Creation: when reviewers review drafts, they're shaping the very first experience many people have with Wikipedia. So, it's extremely important that reviewers are there to help new editors as much as possible, to encourage new editors to come back and contribute more to Wikipedia.
The theme of Winner 42's comments about your reviewing was communication. Winner 42 didn't feel like you were adequately communicating with the authors of drafts you reviewed. Unfortunately, I have to say that I agree; at press time, I count six queries from draft authors that you haven't responded to. It's pretty important to respond to requests for advice on how to improve drafts you decline.
To go back to those complaints about your reviews, I can spot one complaint on Winner 42's talk page about your reviewing. On the draft in question, you left a comment that sounds a bit confusing. I'm guessing that once Winner 42 saw what he or she considered a pattern of these sorts of comments, you got taken off the review list.
Winner 42 said to come back when you are more experienced and have gotten more of your own drafts through AfC as well. I agree that getting some more drafts through the process shows that you have knowledge of the process and can be trusted to review some more drafts. Regarding mentorship, I'm of the opinion that you should probably get more experience with the process through ways other than reviewing (e.g. helping new authors with their articles or, as I said before, getting more articles through the process). No hard feelings at all! APerson (talk!) 19:09, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK nom notice[edit]

Hi, can I please opt out of being spam noticed for every single DYK nom? I've just removed 3 kb of messages from your bot. I don't see the point it in in all honesty, everytime somebody noms with a name linked it pings people anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, as indicated on my bot's user page, it's exclusion compliant. So, all you have to do is edit the {{bots}} transclusion on your talkpage so that it reads {{bots|deny=Theo's Little Bot,APersonBot}} instead of {{bots|deny=Theo's Little Bot}}. APerson (talk!) 23:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Module talk:Main[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Module talk:Main. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done APerson (talk!) 18:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Future Reviewer[edit]

I did answer the queries on the authors talk pages. Would it be okay if I help with AFC pending articles and ask you for advice? Thank you.Adyoo3 (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 00:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done APerson (talk!) 18:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

New layout[edit]

I have made some changes to reduce the visual impact of the relist template on AfD pages and AfD log pages. The plan is to use a boxed format, to avoid the lines going all the way across the page as the previous version did and to encapsulate it on the page, again, avoiding the layout with lines. I would really like to try it out for awhile with this format, so reverting the recent change that added back the lines. North America1000 17:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Cool, no problem if you'd like to try it out for some time. Personally, I prefer the air version without side borders because it resembles some <hr>'s around the text, but again, I agree with reducing the visual impact of the template. APerson (talk!) 18:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is occurring at Template talk:Relist#New layout that involves changes to the template. (It was reverted to a previous version other than the one I created and the one that you created). North America1000 22:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification! APerson (talk!) 18:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Quixotic plea[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 03:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, although I was a bit late to the discussion. APerson (talk!) 18:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian states[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian states. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)