User talk:49ersBelongInSanFrancisco

Thanks for noticing the duplication

Hey, I saw that you deleted the duplicate article that i posted and wanted to thank you noticing its redundancy! (I apologize if I'm not using this correctly, I never used this feature before). The Red Rat Writer (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

IPs similar to 175.120.229.46

Hey man, while adding those vandalism templates to pages like this is certainly standard procedure, if you see this automated vandalism with similar edit summaries, feel free to just report to AIV with a link to Special:AbuseFilter/815. Cheers, —GFOLEY FOUR!— 09:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Economic importance of bacteria

I'm terribly sorry, we had an edit conflict just now, stimulated by your absolutely correct observations on this article: I didn't mean to tread on you. I've suggested a way ahead on the talk page; there is more than enough work here for everyone. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

You asked what else there was to do; the main task is surely to add citations to the uncited material. As that is done, new materials will certainly come to light. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For improving Wheels For Wishes, a highly misleading ADVERT before you made the effort to write - and source - it right. E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

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

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Overprescription

I am certain this can be expanded into an article; there have been many articles and essays about this phenomenon beyond defining it. I de-prodded it. Bearian (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Kelly leonard

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kelly leonard, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: previously declined. Do not retag pages an admin already declined. Doing so can be considered admin-shopping. Thank you. SoWhy 08:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Deletion Of "List Of Gaming Computers"

Can I Hide The Article And Edit It? N64 Gamer 500 (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

@N64 Gamer 500: I appreciate your willingness to edit the article. It looks like you have improved it, but I don't know that it is appropriate subject matter for an encyclopedia no matter how much energy you put into it. I don't want you to waste your time on an article that might not be sustainable, so I'm going to put it up for discussion now so that there's a definite judgment one way or the other. Thanks for checking in! 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Response to Your Message

Hi there, I'm not sure if this is the right way to leave a message, but I hope I'm doing the right thing. You have message me with regards to a section that I removed from a Wiki page. The reason is that I do not believe the events mentioned are correct and best representative to the truth. I have the feeling that whoever wrote these sections is/are only trying to give themselves some exposure and promotion at the expense of truth. I'm not sure if removing the section was the best thing to do, but I believe that when some individuals' names are mentioned in an incorrect manner, sections like those should not be up. Please let me know what you think. Sincerely.

I also apologize for having removed the sections again. I did that before noticing your message. Thank you.

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SophieTrophie (talk • contribs) 08:10, 8 April 2017 (UTC) 

@SophieTrophie: Hi SophieTrophie, thanks for sharing your concerns. In general, it is frowned upon to delete large sections of a Wikipedia article without explanation. When there's no explanation it's impossible to know if you deleted a large section by accident, because you simply didn't like it, or because it was incorrect. If you have a more balanced perspective that is backed by independent sources, I'd strongly encourage you to edit the page and incorporate those new sources. If you think the whole section is not correct, you can give an explanation in your edit summary message (the box below the editing window) or you can take the discussion to the article's talk page (Talk:Student_Federation_of_the_University_of_Ottawa). Thanks!49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 10:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Benutzer

(Move log); 07:28 . . 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk | contribs) moved page Benutzer:Die freiburgerin/Artikelentwurf to Perfect PDF Premium ‎(Moving to article name)

Benutzer is German for User. I'd moved the previous version to User:Die freiburgerin/Artikelentwurf, It's starting to look like Die freiburgerin isn't interested in following advice. Cabayi (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 826 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

• On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
• Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

vital capacity

Hello, I am a doctoral student and noticed a slight mistake in the vital capacity wiki. I tried to add a citation but have never edited a wikipedia page before :) Generally, with obstructive lung diseases (asthma, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, etc.) lung volume is normal or increased because of air trapping as there is decreased alveolar elastic recoil. https://vula.uct.ac.za/access/content/group/9c29ba04-b1ee-49b9-8c85-9a468b556ce2/DOh/Module%204%20_Toxom%20II_/toxom2/NWHITE/Graphics/1-20.png

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Kudpung. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, سید وحید اشرف, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Just curious...

...are the 49ers talking about leaving SF? Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken:They left the City for Santa Clara a couple years ago.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 07:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Facepalm Of course they did. As a New Yorker, I'm so used to our football teams not playing in New York City, and not even in New York State, that I interpreted your name as meaning that the 49ers were going to leave the San Francisco area for some other metropolitan area, but completely forgot that the new stadium wasn't in the city. Sorry about that.

BTW, San Francisco is my second-favorite city in the U.S. (after NYC), and I'm always bummed that I spend more time (because of my work) in Los Angeles then I do in SF -- although I was there in April. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Steve Wynn, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you.

That edit is concerning a widely-reported controversy. The paragraph is full of different major media citations. You may revise the words or raise any specific question on the talk page. Rude removal of all words without really reading the sources or providing sound reasons on the talk page is kind of vandalism. --Wildcursive (talk) 06:19, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Why my links are inappropriate?

Comment below left by User:JaneySmith

Thank you for your remark! I have read the guidelines once again and noticed that “External links” section should be kept minimal, and, according to this excerpt: “If the website or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source for the article, and citing it.”, should I cite the content of a page I linked to? But then it would be a reference, wouldn’t it? I am a bit confused here. I would like to continue adding the links to the pages with consumers reviewing Canadian insurance companies, but I would also like to know if I would be banned for this. I welcome any commentary, tips, and links to guidelines, which can help in improving my work here. I am new on Wiki, but I want to become a part of the family and be useful to this community. Thank you! P.S. I do not affiliate myself to Insureye Reviews Platform. I found this site a quite long age. All pages I link to are not commercial, though they do mention the possibility of using Insureye services. The site collects a lot of real reviews of Canadian insurance companies’ services and I thought that they might be useful for readers of Wikipedia. Anyway, why do you consider it to be spamming?

Reply

@JaneySmith: You added links to the same for-profit insurance review site to 30+ articles with very spammy titles. You have made no other meaningful contributions to the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is often vandalized by website owners who want to promote their website in Wikipedia or think that it will help their search rankings. This instance seemed to fit all the patterns: a for-profit site copying links to many Wikipedia pages without meaningful interactions. If you'd like to learn more about proper external links, please visit Wikipedia:External links. Please also consider Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming. If you think that your links still pass the tests in those articles please feel free to try again and explain in your edit summary why the link is proper, but I would strongly advise against trying 30+ at a time again.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Rollback

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 06:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Elemental Sculpture Park

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Elemental Sculpture Park, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: if any reliable sources exist, that's enough to indicate significance. Use WP:AFD instead. Thank you. SoWhy 08:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Argument against Proposed deletion of WAPT (software deployment)

Hi 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco,

you have added the "Proposed deletion" header to the article WAPT (deployment software) that I added yesterday evening. This article is a translation of the same page in French. Even though it may not be that notorious in the US, it is on this side of the Atlantic (mostly in French speaking countries).

To address the problems mentioned in the header, like the notoriety, I have already mentioned in the article that it has been audited and certified for Elementary Security Level (CSPN) by ANSSI, the French national cyberdefense Agency, which would be the French equivalent of NIST. CSPN is a kind of "light" version of Common Criteria certification. Actually WAPT just went through the "Elementary Qualification" process of ANSSI, which is the next step in certification process, but it has not yet been published on the ANSSI site. Indeed WAPT is heavily used in French administrations and certification.

WAPT is also part of curriculum in colleges and universities (you can find it mentioned on BCS programs), and it has just crossed the 400k desktops installed base.

The only caveat I would agree to is that the material around WAPT is still mostly in French. To address this issue, there has been a lot of work around internationalization of the project both on the software, the documentation and the community.

Cardondenis (talk) 10:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)