User talk:Polyamorph

Citations

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing State v. Queen. May I ask what citations need to be added per the tag you added? As far I can see all information is cited. Matt14451 (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes you're right, the lead looked a bit bare of sources but they're all covered in the main article, so I've removed the tag. Polyamorph (talk) 18:46, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Matt14451 (talk) 18:51, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Polyamorph,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

JINGLE BELLS

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic) Atsme✍🏻📧 00:19, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
	Time To Spread A Little Happy Holiday Cheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: *it doesn't need water *won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

Xmas

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:52, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hey Polyamorph! Nice to see you back around the place. Thanks for the Christmas wishes. You know, I was thinking about you just the other day. When working on a project of mine, I discovered something, but couldn't find anything about it on the internet nor in any books. Since it has to do with glass, I thought, "Polyamorph would probably know something about this." Unfortunately, that's about as specific as I can get until this project moves past the classified stage, but perhaps I can ask you about it sometime in the future, off Wikipedia, if that's ok with you? (If you'd prefer not, that's ok too.) Aside from that, I hope you had a great Christmas holiday and a good New Year's celebration, and may the coming year bring you happiness and joy! Zaereth (talk) 00:52, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

@Zaereth: Happy New Year to you too! I'm happy to assist if I'm able to, you can contact me using the wiki e-mail function. Best wishes, Polyamorph (talk) 10:04, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Polyamorph. Sorry for the delay. I sent you an email. No hurry on the response, as it's something I'm just curious about. Thanks for any insight you may be able to provide. I hope you have a good day Zaereth (talk) 22:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Jess Wade

		The New Page Reviewer's Silver Award
		Hi. How's this for a blunder on my part: When I first drafted the brief mention for the 'In The Media' column in the upcoming issue of The Signpost, I didn't even realise that she has a Wikipedia article, and I was about to say it was time she had one. It's really nice to see someone with your professional and academic background finding time to patrol new pages - it's rare, and for 2,673 reviews this barnstar is long overdue. But let's not be too hard on Ben for his COI, Wade is so notable she would have got a Wiki page sooner or later anyway, and I would have written it myself. Thank you for all you do and keep up the good work!~~~~

Thanks for the Silver award! Polyamorph (talk) 09:23, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

The Loney situation

I have lately been working on expanding the List of Royal Navy admirals. One site that has tabulated a good deal of information on many admirals is www.pdavis.nl with its "William Loney R.N." database...it sets out to place in context the life of a Victorian naval surgeon by that name who I believe is related to the site maintainer. In checking out the article on an admiral linked to the list I found an actual link to "William Loney" as this admiral had directly worked with and supported the surgeon. Following the link however led to a redirect to the completely irrelevant later sportsman Willie Loney...even though the link from the admiral relating exclusively to the surgeon was the one and only link to "William Loney" on Wikipedia and therefore the only reason anyone would look for "William" would be to find the surgeon. I tried converting the redirect to a stub on the surgeon and got reverted (once more making the link from the admiral's article useless). I tried blanking the redirect to spare people taking the link from the admiral's article in order to learn about the surgeon the annoyance of being redirected to the article on the sportsman and got reverted. Now I find the link from the admiral's article has been removed and therefore NOTHING links to "William Loney". NOTHING excuses the existence of that redirect. I'll leave deletion to you. LE (talk) 17:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi @LE:, I get your point of course, but my reversion was only a matter of procedure, you cannot blank redirects. If you think the redirect should be deleted then you should instead open a discussion at WP:RFD. Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 19:13, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

That's a redirect that should never have existed in the first place. Now that nothing links to it I leave cleanup to others.LE (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Well it still works as a legitimate search term, so it has use. Polyamorph (talk) 19:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Help

Hello Polyamorph. Thank you for helping me with the Mansun article earlier. Can you look at this article to approve that all of these bands are Britpop? Thanks. Dean12065 (talk) 01:47, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

BLP Sources Tag on Marie Royce Page

Hello Polyamorph,

I am new to editing on Wikipedia, though I've found its contents extremely helpful since I first discovered it many years ago. Since I am new, please forgive my ignorance or any mistakes I may make.

I noticed recently that there is a BLP Sources tag on the page of Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs Marie Royce. From what I can glean from the Edit page, you added the tag on 2 July 2018, a few months after the page was created. After researching Wikipedia's citations and biographies of living persons policies, it appears to me that the current page is adequately sourced.

Do you have any ongoing concerns with the page? If not, would it be possible for you to remove the tag? I'm also happy to do this myself, but wanted to check with you first.

Best regards, --AccuracyAficionado (talk) 03:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi AccuracyAficionado, if you're satisfied the article is now well sourced then please feel free to remove the tag. Good sources are important for all wikipedia articles but more urgent for biographies of living people. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 10:08, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Sweetner

Redirecting of this article disturbs interwikis. Most of labels and interwikis of D:Q626292 actually mean D:Q4368298. --Sharouser (talk) 12:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Sweetener listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sweetener. Since you had some involvement with the Sweetener redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Thryduulf (talk) 19:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks I already commented at the RfD, before you sent this. Polyamorph (talk) 20:05, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Notability of Great Blue Hill Observation Tower

As is noted in the article, it is on the National Register of Historic Places. That automatically makes it notable -- in fact, there is an effort to get all the NRHP sites onto WP:EN. We have succeeded for Milton, Massachusetts, where the tower sits, see National Register of Historic Places listings in Milton, Massachusetts, but there are gaps in many parts of the country. .     Jim . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:36, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jim, I'm not entirely sure that being listed on the NRHP makes the subject inherently notable. Where is the policy that states being on the NRHP makes the subject notable? Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 12:22, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

In any case, I've removed the notability tag per WP:NBUILDING, despite the fact that is doesn't mention NRHP, this is clearly an historic register.Polyamorph (talk) 12:29, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the tag. Although this is WP:EN, I would not expect WP:NBUILDING to mention the NRHP specifically, just as it does not mention the UK's listed buildings or any other entries on the List of heritage registers. .     Jim . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Milde-Biese-Aland

Hi Polyamorph, you recently reverted my modification at "Milde-Biese-Aland" (which I actually reverted again) - you are welcome to share your opinion here: Draft_talk:Milde-Biese-Aland --Cyfal (talk) 11:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation

Hello

Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.

We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.

Trizek (WMF), 08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation - link update

The previous message about the talk pages consultation has a broken link.

The correct link has been misinterpreted by the MassMessage tool. Please use the following link: Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Trizek (WMF), 08:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Informality

Greetings! The page on informality was reverted. Why? Best regards, --Alexandrov98 (talk) 16:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

You copied it word from word from here: http://www.in-formality.com/wiki/index.php?title=The_informal_view_of_the_world . This is not permitted by wikipedia policy. Polyamorph (talk) 21:18, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Polyamorph,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 21:35, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 04:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 02:36, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Redirecting albums

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I think based on your redirecting Dogrel that you need to reconsider when you redirect articles, especially albums over what meets the definition of "not notable". That article clearly passes WP:NALBUMS. The reviews box located below the template has seven sources in it, with six of those passing the first criterion of NALBUMS with flying colours ("Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it.") Your redirecting would not hold up at AfD. If you disagree and think it is still truly not notable, please nominate it there. Thanks. Ss112 20:15, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

I wholly disagree on your interpretation of WP:NALBUMS on what makes an album suitable for a standalone independent article on Wikipedia. There may well be some reliable sources cited for that album, but there is no in-depth discussion based around those sources justifying a stand-alone article. Perhaps the redirect target should be to the band, but my decision at the time was to restore the existing redirect. I have no intention of opening an AfD. Polyamorph (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not my "interpretation" of WP:NALBUMS; NALBUMS does not say there needs to be in-depth discussion of sources on the article, just that there needs to be sources out there on it. Deletion discussions often also say the sources don't even need to be on the article, just exist per WP:NEXIST. Also, you might not want to go to AfD, but when someone disagrees with you redirecting an article for "failing notability" (in your opinion), then that is the next step, as you might be aware. Nobody is justified in edit warring to restore a redirect, so please don't do that on any future articles, because from your contributions it looks like you have done this occasionally. Admins will tell you when your bold redirect of a page is undone, the next stop is AfD. Also, leaving me an (automated) talk page message about "unreviewing" a page I curated. I created the redirect, not the content, and I didn't curate or do anything else to it in the first place. Ss112 05:21, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

What WP:NALBUMS actually says is "a recording may be notable if it meets at least one of these criteria". You have come to my talk page, not the other way around. Automated messages are the result of the NPP software. I unreviewed the page so that the page can get a second look at NPP. As far as I am concerned this is the end of the matter. There is no evidence of edit warring, please keep such accusations with zero evidence to yourself. Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 05:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reverted edit on Bartholin's duct

Why did you revert my edit on Bartholin's duct? The term referred not only to the current redirect, but also to the major sublingual duct. -- Uqemail (talk) 10:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Uqemail there is no need for disambiguation here, since Bartholin's duct is one part of the Major sublingual duct. The previous appropriate redirect was therefore restored. Polyamorph (talk) 09:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Bartholin's duct isn't part of it, it is the major sublingual duct (which is in the mouth under the tongue), which is completely distinct from the duct of Bartholin's gland (which is on the side of the vagina). Since the term refers to both, there should be a disambiguation. -- Uqemail (talk) 11:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Ok Uqemail, apologies, I'll restore the disambiguation page. Polyamorph (talk) 07:01, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Polyamorph,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Sri Lanka Army Women's Corps

@P.Amorph, References have been added in Sri Lanka Army Women's Corps. Raja Kaiya Vacha (talk) 03:43, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleted Alo House Recovery Center

Why did you delete my article? I can't seem to contest the deletion. Can you please revert it back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanedge (talk • contribs) 15:06, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

1) It was not your article, users do not own content posted on wikipedia. 2) I did not delete the article, I nominated it for speedy deletion as it was unambiguous advertising, which is against wikipedia policy, and an administrator (Deb) agreed and deleted it.Polyamorph (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Polyamorph,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Internal Security Council

Dear Polyamorph

Just to let you know that I'm a history researcher looking at this event in close detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthandjusticewillprevail (talk • contribs) 15:42, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Whole article removed - Ki Aikido - Why ?

Hi I updated the Ki Aikido page, to stop redirecting to Ki Society automatically, and be its own page (with links to Ki Society but also two other federations doing Ki Aikido with their own style). Why cancel the change ? Do you know the subject ?

You can find more information on ki aikido history in the article & its links, Aikido Journal, ki aikido clubs website ( ki society, ki no kenkyukai internationale association, ki federation of great britain). --AikidoWizard (talk) 12:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

At this time the article is a bit pants. Feel free to expand the article, with reference to reliable sources.Polyamorph (talk) 12:53, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you - I will add a lot more ( ki aikido history, branches, ... ) with the few secondary sources we have (Aikido Journal, Ki aikido books). --AikidoWizard (talk) 13:43, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey

i want to create a page Mohammad qasim why its redirect to another person, why a person have 2 names on 1 page? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mohammad_Qasim this redirect should be removed so other have a chance to create a profile for other well known persons, why wikipedia given 2 names pages to one person??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah1440 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Please read WP:BLP which provides the relevant policy.Polyamorph (talk) 09:56, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for Deleting Redirect Page of Mohammad Qasim

Hey, i want to make request to delete a page Mohammad Qasim on WP which is redirect to another person Moulana Mohammad Qasim, i dont know why Mr. Saqib redirect it to another page and giving political benefits to that person, if u see Mr Saqib talk page he already make alot to changes and give benefits to other people and senior users removed his changes, kindly remove/delete that page Mohammad Qasim so i can make a page for another well known personalty in Pakistan so people have a chance to find more about that person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah1440 (talk • contribs) 10:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I cannot help you, you could try to discuss your request with users at Wikipedia:Teahouse instead. Polyamorph (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

thank you for your reply