User talk:Compassionate727

This user has opted out of talkbacks

Please comment on Talk:Princess Zelda

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Princess Zelda. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bruno Bettelheim

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bruno Bettelheim. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Postmodern art

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Postmodern art. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jeremy Corbyn

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jeremy Corbyn. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Compassionate727,

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)

Please comment on Talk:Historical rankings of presidents of the United States

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Historical rankings of presidents of the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2019 Indian general election

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Indian general election. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Populism

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Populism. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The New York Times

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The New York Times. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Athens Polytechnic uprising

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Athens Polytechnic uprising. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Santa Claus

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Santa Claus. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ronna McDaniel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ronna McDaniel. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox country

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox country. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/May 23

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/May 23. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Appeal to nature

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Appeal to nature. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019

• From the editors: Picture that

• News and notes: Wikimania and trustee elections

• In the media: Politics, lawsuits and baseball

• Discussion report: Admin abuse leads to mass-desysop proposal on Azerbaijani Wikipedia

• Arbitration report: ArbCom forges ahead

• Traffic report: Dark marvels, thrones, a vile serial killer biopic, that's entertainment!

• Technology report: Lots of Bots

• News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation petitions the European Court of Human Rights to lift the block of Wikipedia in Turkey

• Recent research: Wikipedia more useful than academic journals, but is it stealing the news?

• Essay: Paid editing

• From the archives: FORUM:Should Wikimedia modify its terms of use to require disclosure?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 2

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 2. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tulsi Gabbard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tulsi Gabbard. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lavender Hill Mob (gay activist group)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Lavender Hill Mob (gay activist group). Legobot (talk) 04:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John William Waterhouse

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:John William Waterhouse. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Game of Thrones title sequence

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Game of Thrones title sequence. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
• An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
• An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

• The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
• Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

• The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
• The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Central Park jogger case

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Central Park jogger case. Legobot (talk) 04:36, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thomas Rosica

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Thomas Rosica. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of airliner shootdown incidents

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of airliner shootdown incidents. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

GOCE June newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2019. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 16 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. June Blitz: Our June blitz will soon be upon us; it will begin at 00:01 on 16 June (UTC) and will close at 23:59 on 22 June (UTC). The themes are "nature and the environment" and all requests. March Drive: Thanks to everyone for their work in March's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from 182 of the articles tagged in our original target months October and November 2018, and the month finished with 64 target articles remaining from November and 811 in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 22 requests for copyedit in March; the month ended with 34 requests pending. Of the 32 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the April Blitz; the blitz ran from 14 to 20 April (UTC) inclusive and the themes were Sports and Entertainment. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 04:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 267 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 605 articles. May Drive: During the May Backlog Elimination Drive, Guild copy-editors removed copyedit tags from 191 of the 192 articles tagged in our original target months of November and December 2018, and January 2019 was added on 22 May. We finished the month with 81 target articles remaining and a record low of 598 articles in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 24 requests for copyedit during the May drive, and the month ended with 35 requests pending. Of the 26 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Forum for Democracy

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Forum for Democracy. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Chuck Tingle

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Chuck Tingle. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLVIII, June 2019

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the Dambusters, and Hawkeye7 at Allied code breakers and Australia in New Guinea and Vietnam Op-ed: TomStar81 on the treaty that ended World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Ahnentafel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Ahnentafel. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tonsillectomy

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tonsillectomy. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sabine Weyand

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sabine Weyand. Legobot (talk) 04:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Chuck Tingle

Hi, I disagree with your close of Chuck Tingle RFC as at this stage it is a clear no consensus. Also your close was very opinionated like a super-vote, that would have been better as a comment than a close. WP:NOT states that full lists of creative works are acceptable and MOS regarding collapsible lists is a guideline. Can you please reopen the RFC for a clearer consensus to be reached? regards Atlantic306 (talk) 14:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Of course. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:25, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

thanks, sorry I was a bit bitey earlier, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 22:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atlantic306: No worries! I didn't seem that way to me, but I am essentially tone-deaf, so you're probably a better judge of what is bitey than I am. If I seemed defensive in my note on the talk page, I want you to know it wasn't because I was offended. I just felt I needed to publicly stake a position that clarified I wasn't conceding to all of your points here, lest I come out of that looking extremely foolish. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 17:48, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electric smoking system

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rheumatoid arthritis

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rheumatoid arthritis. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States free speech exceptions

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States free speech exceptions. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 14

Newsletter • June 2019

Updates: I've been focusing largely on the development side of things, so we are a lot closer now to being ready to actually start discussing deploying it and testing it out here.

There's just a few things left that need to be resolved:

• A bunch of language support issues in particular, plus some other release blockers, such as the fact that currently there's no good way to find any hubs people do create.
• We also probably need some proper documentation and examples up to even reference if we want a meaningful discussion. We have the extension documentation and some test projects, but we probably need a bit more. Also I need to be able to even find the test projects! How can I possibly write reports about this stuff if I can't find any of it?!

Some other stuff that's happened in the meantime:

• Midpoint report is out for this round of the project, if you want to read in too much detail about all the problems I've been running into.
• WikiProject Molecular Biology have successfully set up using the old module system that CollaborationKit is intended to replace (eventually), and it even seems to work, so go them. Based on the issues they ran into, it looks like the members signup thing on that system has some of the same problems as we've been unable to resolve in CK, though, which is... interesting. (Need to change the content model to the right thing for the formwizard config to take. Ugh, content models.)

Until next time,

-— Isarra ༆ 21:43, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Polyphenol

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Polyphenol. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jimi Hendrix posthumous discography

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jimi Hendrix posthumous discography. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electric smoking system

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:EOKA

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:EOKA. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Singing Nun

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The Singing Nun. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John Stott

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:John Stott. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Brill - Help

Hello, I am Gazal world. Do you have access to Brill? Your name is listed here. And If you have, can you check that this book is available or not through your subscription. Thanks. --Gazal world (talk) 13:53, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

 Working. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 13:56, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Gazal world: Looks like students' access expires at my institution following each semester. I am currently corresponding with the library staff, and may or may not be able to access Brill at a later time. I apologize for the inconvenience. I'll ping you if there are any further developments. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 14:29, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --Gazal world (talk) 21:47, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Gazal world: The latest news is: my permissions have been fixed, but my college does not subscribe to all of Brill's content, just five specific journals. The one you want access to is not one of them. I can probably obtain the article you want via Interlibrary Loan, but what you need it for will determine how I go about that and what I do with it once I have it. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 13:51, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Thank you very much for your reply. I really appreciate it. It would be great help If you can help me to obtain Chapter 2 (pp. 39-90) and Chapter 3 (pp. 91-134) from it. Thanks again. --Gazal world (talk) 14:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello mate. Please note that, Now I need only chapter 4 (pp. 135-190) and Chapter 5 (pp. 191-294). To be honest, if you not fine with the page range, feel free to narrow it down. --Gazal world (talk) 18:07, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gazal world: Well, the copies you are requesting I make are almost certainly illegal, but I'm willing to do it anyway, so long as you don't go posting it all over the Internet. I probably need to verify with my librarian that the journal is in fact coming, however. But now I'm kind of baffled by your request. You formerly needed chapters 2 and 3, but no longer, and instead need the next two? Why not? Did you obtain those two chapters from elsewhere? And you say that if I'm not comfortable with the page range, I can narrow it down. But don't you need them for research (i.e., to read them)? How will parts of chapters (or some such) be adequate? —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for your reply, mate. Sorry, I am not good in English, so I always avoid to write further details.

1. Yes, I have obtained Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 from the 'Resource Exchange' page of German wiki (see

w:de:Wikipedia:Bibliotheksrecherche/Anfragen). I could have requested for Chapter 4 and 5 there but it is against Resource Exchange pages policy. (According to policy, we can request only some parts of the book. i.e 80-100 pages.)

1. I have wrote to "narrow down" my request, because I believe that scanning more than 50 pages is difficult job. So, it is really not a good thing to ask you for scanning large amounts of pages. (I could manage to obtain remained pages through WP:RX.)
2. If you think that this is an illegal practice, please let it go. Wikiepdia research is not much important than our moral idea. We are editing wiki only for our own sake.
3. I never publish a copy of 'resource material' on internet which has been sent by other Wikiepdians. I deliver daily number of articles and chapters to other Wikiepdians through WP:RX page, assuming same faith that they would not publish it on Internet.

Apologize, if I have made any mistake in writing English. Thanks and kind regards. --Gazal world (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gazal world: Do you still need chapters four and five? I just received the ILL. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 19:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Compassionate727, Thanks for your message. If it is not a matter of trouble, I would like to have it. And, as I have said above, feel free to narrow down my request. --Gazal world (talk) 20:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ronald Reagan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ronald Reagan. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Compassionate727,

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)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

• Discussion report: A constitutional crisis hits English Wikipedia

• News and notes: Mysterious ban, admin resignations, Wikimedia Thailand rising

• In the media: The disinformation age

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

• Traffic report: Juneteenth, Beauty Revealed, and more nuclear disasters

• Technology report: Actors and Bots

• Gallery: Unlike the North Face, Wiki Loves Earth

• Special report: Did Fram harass other editors?

• Recent research: What do editors do after being blocked?; the top mathematicians, universities and cancers according to Wikipedia

• From the archives: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching

• Opinion: Why the Terms of Use change didn't curtail undisclosed paid editing—and what might

• In focus: WikiJournals: A sister project proposal

• Community view: A CEO biography, paid for with taxes

• Op-Ed: 2019 Wikimedia Affiliate Selected Board Seats Election Results

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam¹ • Flyguy649 • Fram² • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

¹Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

²Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Bureaucrat changes

28bytes • WJBscribe • Wizardman

Interface administrator changes

MSGJ • TheDJ

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD

Oversight changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD • GB fan

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

• In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

• The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
• The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
• A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

• In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Television licensing in the United Kingdom

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Television licensing in the United Kingdom. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Goop (company)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Goop (company). Legobot (talk) 04:35, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kodomo no Jikan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kodomo no Jikan. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Charles Desmarais

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Charles Desmarais. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of the verified oldest people

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of the verified oldest people. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:POV check

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:POV check. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Article for Porygon, Porygon2, or Poryon-Z

Can you help me make an article about them? I have an article about porygon already but Its not published. So can you help me please? Porygon-Z (talk) 04:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

@Porygon-Z474: Well, you have an uphill battle ahead of you, that's for sure. Once upon a time, there were articles for almost every Pokémon on Wikipedia, which resulted in people trying to make arguments for notability (the project's inclusion standard) by comparing them to Pokémon. You can look at Wikipedia:Pokémon test for more information on that. Ultimately, most such articles were merged.

Ultimately, there's one thing you need to include an article on Wikipedia, and that's high-quality sources. Normally, we tell editors that we expect at least two of them. I won't repeat what makes a source high-quality—WP:GNG explains it better than I would—but I can give you a breakdown of the sources currently in your draft.

• RankedBoost seems to be a database containing entries of all Pokémon, and I would thus consider this to be routine coverage. There's a guideline, WP:ROUTINE that says that routine coverage doesn't establish notability. That guideline is discussing events specifically, so it doesn't necessarily apply to your draft, but most editors at Articles for Deletion are likely to argue that a such an entry is not significant coverage. In particular, they are likely to argue that the information included is trivia, and not actually discussing the subject in any true detail.
• I received a 403 Forbidden error while attempting to access cosc.canterbury.ac.nz, but I'm guessing from the title that this article doesn't event mention Porygon, and that you're just using to cite the information on polygons and 3D graphics. If so, it doesn't establish notability.
• Serebii is in the same position as RankedBoost.
• YouTube is not a reliable source.
• Pokemondb is like RankedBoost and Serebii.
• GameInformer merely includes Porygon in a couple of lists. Not significant coverage.
• This Metro article doesn't even discuss Porygon, just an episode where it is named in the title. Definitely not significant.
• BreakingCanon appears to be a self-published source, which are generally considered unreliable unless the author is already established as reputable.
• PokeCommunity is a forum—definitely not reliable.
• Pokémon.com is routine/trivial like the databases from before, and also definitely not independent of the subject.
• Troll and Toad is routine/trivial like Pokémon.com.

This is not to say these are all bad sources and need to be removed—they just don't count for the purposes of establishing notability. I cannot say whether you will be able to find sources that establish its notability, but I would guess not. And unfortunately, you have it worse with this topic than many others. Precisely because it's a Pokémon, and people have (at least historically) frequently created bad articles about non-notable Pokémon, people at AfD will be predisposed to vote delete.

If you are still determined to move forward, I would suggest that you look at high-quality articles of other Pokémon, like Pikachu, to better grasp what kinds of sources we're looking for. The kind of coverage contained in your BreakingCanon article, by more-reliable sources, is what you want. It would also be a good idea to ask for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon, in particular because the editors there are more familiar with the topic and may be better able than me to help you find quality sources. However, I feel I should warn you that topics are judged non-notable because those kinds of sources are believed to not exist—you are welcome to try, but I wouldn't get your hopes up. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:12, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

I do have a few questions about what you said. First of all, I understand where you're coming from and thank you, but what about Porygon2 and Porygon-Z? They do have interesting things about them. Does the article need to be long? I can merge the episode of Porygon with the article. And lastly, what about verified things on Youtube like how they areeee in battle, thier name origins, and more? Are they eligible? Porygon-Z (talk) 17:48, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, you don't have a draft of Porygon2 or Porygon-Z that I can comment on, but I would expect them to have the same notability problems that Porygon does. As for whether you can use YouTube, I would need you to clarify what you mean by "verified". A YouTube video by a channel affiliated with Pokémon, such as Nintendo, would be considered a reliable source of information by most editors, but would not count toward notability because it would not be independent. A YouTube video by a popular gaming channel would not count as reliable, I expect, except for perhaps very basic information. If you're talking about the information in the video being verified, it would be better to go straight to the source for that, if possible. Note that details which can be easily verified (e.g., the plot of movie) typically do not require citations.

As far as length goes, that depends. Sometimes articles are very short because information is available about them, but nobody has yet taken the time to add it. The community finds that acceptable, although we would much prefer that while you are going to the trouble to create the article at all, you add the available content also. However, sometimes articles are very short because there is simply nothing else that would be advantageous to say about them. In these cases, merging the stubs into a parent topic is preferred, if possible. I would advise against merging the episode into an article about Porygon, however, because the amount of content in the episode article would unbalance an article about the Pokémon. You can copy some of it, of course, provided you attribute it correctly, but I would not remove anything from Dennō Senshi Porygon in the process. I should also refer you to WP:INHERIT: the fact that Porygon was featured in a notable television episode does not, in itself, confer notability on Porygon, because you still need to establish that Porygon itself has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. WP:1E may also apply. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 19:11, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Well since Porygon2 or Porygon-Z dont' have much info about them, I could make them an article providing some info. But I don't know to write an article. Porygon-Z (talk) 00:29, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

You are, of course, more than welcome to try to create articles for them, but I must advise you that if you cannot procure better sourcing about either of them than you were for Draft:Porygon, you won't get very far. The simple fact is that you can write a stellar article, but if you cannot show that the topic merits inclusion in an encyclopedia by demonstrating its notability, it won't be retained. Furthermore, if you are struggling to write an encyclopedia article, it is likely because the topic is not worthy of one. Sure, there is a lot of information about various Pokémon out there, but much of it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Information that doesn't help a general audience better understand the subject, like its Max CP and other stats (to give a random example—I'm not implying you've done this), would be better suited for Wikia than Wikipedia. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

What info can I put in an article? Is it enough or a good article? Porygon-Z (talk) 01:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I beg your pardon, but I don't understand your question. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 13:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Silente

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Silente. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tuo Chiang-class corvette

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tuo Chiang-class corvette. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Compassionate727. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:32, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States involvement in regime change

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States involvement in regime change. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:African Americans

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:African Americans. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLIX, July 2019

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Haweye7, Peacemaker67 and Nick-D on recent books covering the world wars

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:00, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of people with non-binary gender identities

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of people with non-binary gender identities. Legobot (talk) 04:37, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Theodore Edgar McCarrick

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Theodore Edgar McCarrick. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Federalist Society

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Federalist Society. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Closing RfC less than 2 weeks out

Is it kosher to close a RfC less than two weeks from its start, as you did here?[1] I'd also like to note that there were six support votes for including content about CRC's controversial practices and seven opposed to it, yet the closing concluded there was a consensus against the text. I'd also note that most of the oppose votes couldn't even muster an explanation besides pointing to one user's inaccurate claim that CRC's activities were irrelevant to the Federalist Society (somehow every RS that covered the two disagrees with that user). Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Snooganssnoogans: Is it kosher to close after less than two weeks? Sure, if the discussion has essentially ceased, or if future discussion is highly unlikely to change the outcome. I considered the fact that all votes within the past week were "Oppose per reason X that was already stated above", alongside the fact that nobody has commented for three days, to be an indication that discussion had burned out.

As for the support to oppose ratio (5:8, or 6:7 if you count the person who said "Oppose, prefer this other implementation" as a support, as you apparently do), I have two points. 1) Consensus is evaluated by the strength of arguments, not votes; votes are useful only for determining how compelling editors find various arguments. I will also note that 2) of the five (or six) supports, three (or four) said they had problems with the specific proposal—either the detail afforded to the specific controversies was undue, or that the proposal used loaded language that didn't match that of the sources cited—but supported some mention of the connection. Hence, I found that consensus was opposed (in fact, strongly opposed) to the text as presented.

Of course, the RfC was about whether or not to include something "similar" to the proposed text, and that word is ambiguous. I interpreted it, and I suspect many of those who opposed interpreted it, as meaning something substantially identical to the proposal, with allowance for trivial prose edits (so that people do not discuss whether to use a period or a comma and coordinating conjunction in the RfC). Many of the supporters interpreted it to mean whether they supported or opposed the principle of the proposal, that CPC's controversies should be mentioned, and said they supported doing so but opposed the way in which you had done it. There was, of course, no consensus on the principle, in part because many weren't discussing it.

As for the arguments of the opponents, you don't need to repeat an explanation that has already been given; you can simply point to it, and many of them did. Again, votes not being the metric of consensus also applies. And I disagree with your implication that your argument refutes theirs: while it is well established that reliable sources consistently mention the two together, we already mention that the Federalist Society hires CPC, and nobody suggests we shouldn't. I haven't checked whether those sources also consistently mention CPC's controversies, but even if they do, that does not prove we should. Wikipedia's job is to be a reliable, neutral summary of its topics; the job of the Washington Post (for example) is to discuss current events. The differing objectives will lead to differing scopes, and the consequence is that the not everything which the news or others covers is worth our attention.

Your proposed text says that the Federalist Society employs CPC, then explains CPC's controversies. But as participants noted, CPC's controversies are not necessarily the Federalist Society's. Including these controversies in a summary of the Federalist Society implies that they pertain strongly enough to the Federalist Society, that they are an important enough part of what the Federalist Society is, to warrant multiple sentences of a summary. Many editors denied that they are indeed that important, on the grounds that the Federalist Society doing business with an organization that does controversial things for other clients (which is all your proposal mentions) does not prove that the Federalist Society was involved, as that's an association fallacy.

You mentioned in your vote rationale that the CPC is controversial for its attempts to discredit an accuser of Brett Kavanaugh, whose candidacy the Federalist Society supported. Great! There's the connection: find one or two reliable sources that support that connection (note: not one that says the Federalist Society supported Brett Kavanaugh, and one that mentions the CPC's controversy, which would be synthesis, but one or two that mention both), and propose that. Again, you'll need to be careful to word it neutrally and in the way that reliable sources word it. That will garner far more support, although you will again need to word it carefully. Another option is something along the lines of Epiphyllumlover's proposal, which doesn't imply that CPC's controversies are an important part of the Federalist Society's history, just that the Federalist Society does (and is willing to do) business with controversial entities, and thus would probably be unproblematic in most participants' view. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 17:56, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christchurch mosque shootings

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Christchurch mosque shootings. Legobot (talk) 04:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bulgaria

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bulgaria. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gatestone Institute

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Gatestone Institute. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Next United Kingdom general election

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Next United Kingdom general election. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)