User talk:Utopes: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎RfD Question: new section
m I'd like to get two opinions, no answer here so I will ask elsewhere. Have a great week! ~~~~
Line 566: Line 566:
[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=1216676254 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=1216676254 -->

== A question about page review ==

Hello @[[User:Utopes|Utopes]],
I mentioned you in another discussion on another Talk page, but it seems that you haven't seen it, so I will try asking here. I have created some Wikipedia pages and all of them have received "reviewed" status. One didn't – [[Kurk Lietuvai]]. What difference on Wikipedia does it make if an article has been reviewed? Does it in any way indicate lower quality if an article is not reviewed for a long time?

Best regards,<br> [[User:Frequently.by.train|Frequently.by.train]] ([[User talk:Frequently.by.train|talk]]) 15:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


== RfD Question ==
== RfD Question ==

Revision as of 15:26, 10 April 2024


Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
For excellent work at WP:AFIN.

Equalwidth (C) 05:44, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you helping to coordinate the WP:ACE2023 election! — xaosflux Talk 01:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes

added Clovermoss
readded Dennis Brown
removed

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review

Hey Utopes,
Lots of love from Nepal
Thank you for reviewing Province Hospital Janakpur. I hope your reviews and contributions in Wikipedia will play a great role. Cheers and Happy editing. WikiEditorNepali (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Awards for 2023

The New Page Reviewer's Iron Award

For over 360 article reviews during 2023. Well done! Keep up the good work and thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Ninja Award
For all your hard work in 2023! Thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:06, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Poybo Media

Hi Utopes, I finished making this draft longer to the best of my ability. hopefully other editors can expand it more but i'll try to do it later if i remember. i'd appreciate if you could check if it's ready, thx Deondernemers (talk) 07:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing that; I'll resubmit the draft under your name, but I'll leave it to another reviewer to see if someone else can ascertain the plot more than I can. As I mentioned earlier, the references look reliable, but another set of eyes could be warranted now that there's more to chew on. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun The Sheep 2 talk: Farmageddon

Greetings Utopes,

Is this an error? Or I am missing something? Maliner (talk) 06:04, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woah! I am... not sure how that happened, definitely an error. Thanks for catching it! Going to look at other similar edits to see if anything else looks like that, as I haven't seen anything like that before. Very perplexed because that type of message can/would only be placed on a talk page. Again, thank you! Utopes (talk / cont) 06:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Utopes this this and this
Saw it before, this error seems to be occurring since last year where it bugs when a talk page has a : in the middle. Justiyaya 06:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. We all know you're a great editor. Isn't it Justiyaya? Maliner (talk) 06:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciate the heads up all, I'll be mindful when dealing with those requests, and/or CSD any errors such as the above if they slip through the cracks. Cheers! Utopes (talk / cont) 06:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
mhm! emptying the redirects backlog is really nice :D Justiyaya 06:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Justiyaya: You are great, too. I appreciate your efforts in reducing our backlog through your participation in the recent NPP backlog drive. Maliner (talk) 06:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also here to find out why you are creating odd talk pages. I see on the Move log that they are frequently then moved to the correct location. But I see that other editors have brought this issue to you. Liz Read! Talk! 07:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! is an example of what I'm concerned about. Liz Read! Talk! 07:27, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that it's a potential bug / unexpected occurrence in the AFC/R helper script. When creating pages requested at AFC/R, the helper script places a banner on the respective talk page of each redirect created. Most of the time this is done without any problems. However, for a small subset of redirects (all of which contain a colon), there seems to be an issue where this talk page is created in the wrong namespace (article space). Justiyaya linked a discussion where this error was first brought up from last year. I didn't notice there was a problem at first but luckily I believe all of these situations have been taken care of, and I've scanned ahead and there's only one page left in the backlog that contains a colon, yet to be created. Could be good to test on if wanted; hopefully this clears up the situation! Utopes (talk / cont) 07:40, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFC/RC

Archiving empty requests doesn't make sense, but if you want to do so, no problem. Happy editing! – DreamRimmer (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first request had entries that didn't get registered in the right format (but there was no rationale so they probably wouldn't pass). The second case had some text, but the main reason for logging was in case the two IPs wanted to revise their nomination in the future, so at least there's record of it 👍. Probably not the most necessary to keep record of, but during the process of archiving I figured I'd make sure to grab 100% of the non-vandalism requests made rather than cutting the malformatted ones. That way, everything is preserved from the good to the bad, in the very rare chance it'll be looked at again later. No worries, thanks for everything you do, and happy editing! Utopes (talk / cont) 19:20, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the categories

Thank you for recently creating the series of stock market categories, and in doing so, clearing the backlog. Much appreciated. You've helped make progress in something that has been held up by various roadblocks since early November last year. 92.71.60.61 (talk) 11:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFD

Hello, Utopes,

Thanks for taking some of the bad redirects you found to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 21#Chen Mingyi (Taiwan）. It was a snow close to Delete all which I was expecting. But I have seen some redirects with minor grammatical mistakes like this kept for technical reasons which I don't really understand and can't explain. It has to do with how some computers read and interpret text.

I'm just trying to discourage patrollers from using CSD G6 as a "catch-all" criteria that doesn't really stand for anything but articles, redirects or templates that are just wrong. Speedy deletion criteria are intentionally very specific and limited to apply to very obvious cases so pages like this that are clearly incorrect but don't fit a criteria are best going to AFD or RFD where editors who are experienced in reviewing certain types of pages can evaluate them. Liz Read! Talk! 02:36, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Liz, thank you for the alert! I wasn't intending to use G6 as a means to hypothetically "just delete" a page, or in an "absence of rationale". There certainly are certainly a number of these that I've been able to identify, and you may have seen an uptick of such case following the closure of a handful of recent RfDs that you've pulled up, which indicated to me that it might have been a more wide scale issue. Particularly, there is this query which shows the list such cases, as they existed before deletion: [1] (and this is the query which includes pages that are still up, and don't meet the CSD criteria (or I haven't checked them): [2])
This said, I don't think I've been using G6 as a "catch-all" criteria. I completely understand how using it like one would be a problem, because it is important to make sure that CSD criteria are correctly categorized, and deleting something because "it's vaguely not right" is not a good reason for deletion, as this interpretation differs from person to person and not concrete. In the template text for Template:Db-error, it states: "This may meet [the CSD criteria]... as a redirect left over from moving a page that was obviously created at the wrong title". Based on the edit summaries used in every page-move, these pages were very shortly moved to the correct title, after previously being created at the wrong title.
Throughout this process, I feel as if I've been conscientious of which of these pages with unlikely characters I've been nominating. I've been paying attention to edit summaries and move logs to make sure that each page was an early page move from a title created in error, with no other editing history that may have arisen since then. As an example, there's a reason why I tagged Tomomatsu Atsunobu（Scholar) for G6, but have done nothing about the nearly identical Atsunobu Tomomatsu（Scholar） due to the page history of the latter. During the time that I was going through these titles, I also was creating relevant RfD threads such as this and that, as these pages were brand new creations at these titles and not redirects left behind from page moves, thus these did not meet the G6-error criteria.
I don't believe I've made a mistake on this front, but if there are any examples that weren't early page moves from articles created at the wrong title, I would be gracious to know, as this wasn't my intention. 🙏 I appreciate the reminder, as it's always good to make sure the right rationale is used for deletion tags, but you'd also be correct that I didn't want to flood RfD with that many more of these if G6-error was applicable. 😅 I've been trying my best to ensure that the correct channels are used for titles with these characters, but please let me know if there's anything I should be doing differently in the future with these. Thanks again! Utopes (talk / cont) 04:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palworld

I disagree with you about its class. B it is not. I would place this more at a C status. Its written like an advertisement and has grammatical issues. Its really close, but I dot think its there yet per WP:Content assessment#Grades. Im going to run it though WPCleaner and fix it a bit, I already have some. Its in interesting topic. Dillard421♂♂ (talk to me) 23:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Yeshayahu Folman

Hello, you declined my draft and I believe it's a mistake since a few sources are in Hebrew but Yeshayahu was an Israeli and a proffesor in Israel so there are most sources in Hebrew. Can you please review this since all sources are reliable and if one isnt in your opnion I will clear it. Thank you. Shahar Navon new (talk) 16:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re-reviewing for NPP

I was re-reviewing for NPP and came across Godfrey Boyle which has a high Earwig score. I think is suffers from WP:CLOP Bruxton (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar

This award is given in recognition to Utopes for collecting more than 200 points during the January 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 16,070 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 22:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 February newsletter

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unclosed titles

I saw you nominate a load of unclosed titles for RfDs, like Xenophobe (video game, can I ask, why you don't simply run a bot to delete clean those off?? Is it really necessary to go through all the red tape?? Govvy (talk) 22:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! In all honesty, I really do wish there was an easier way to deal with these redirects 🫠. Unfortunately, there is no bot or script that can safely delete these, and it often comes down to an admin pressing the final button. Alongside the RfD nominations, there's also an assortment of pages that get moved, or tagged for speedy-deletion, so the RfDs are just a fraction. While there is a CSD criterion for "redirects left behind from moving pages that were created at the obvious wrong title" (WP:CSD G6), a lot of these have actually been challenged in the past, and not always "made in error". The Xenophobe (video game title that you linked was actually not an error, but intentionally created back in 2022, despite the game article existing since 2003. Because of this, there's no speedy deletion criteria applicable, so RfD is the place to go.
There definitely are a lot of these titles that have ended up at RfD, and there's been a number of discussions looking for solutions to deal with errors in the act of disambiguation without needing RfD. Over on the talk page for WT:CSD, there was a pretty hefty "mini-RfC" about whether or not to create a new CSD criteria for pages that make these errors. And even then, there's been pushback against me using CSD to tackle errors and to just take 100% of everything to RfD, so it's definitely a fine line.
Hopefully that answers your question ^^, I've been trying to space out my noms so they aren't all at once (trying to break these into blocks by letter). This process started back in December, but there's been discussions on how to make this less RfD-heavy; feel free to chip in at WT:CSD if you'd like! The good news is that there started out with 700 pages like Foo (bar, but it's been dropped down to like 350 😅, we'll see how things go from here. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:58, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, okay, shame you can't speedy through them, wikipedia search feature is pretty good, so there really are a lot of useless redirects around. Govvy (talk) 14:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review pages

Hello! Could you review my new pages? Azamat Akhmedov, Dmitrii Adamov and Aznaur Tavaev. Thank you! -- Ricco Baroni (talk) 07:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Idrissa Barry Jalloh/sandbox

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Idrissa Barry Jalloh/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2024 March newsletter

The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.

The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:

In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.

Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New editor: Thanks so much

Hi there user Utopes. I wanted to say thank you for reviewing my draft for T-Money so quickly, it was my first wikipedia article for creation submission and you gave me some great feedback. I also got some help through Teahouse. I was wondering if you would be willing to take a look at the edits I made to my draft, and lend more feedback. I'd be greatly appreciative! @Utopes Taevchoi (talk) 22:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I took another look at the article and it's looking pretty solid so far. Looks to be neutrally-worded, the sources seem solid enough, and as a whole I think it could totally stand on its own as an article. The only current roadblock that I can foresee with this draft, is the precedent at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T-Money (rapper), specifically the fact that T-Money didn't quite meet the notability guidelines for musicians at the time, set out by WP:MUSICBIO. I think what you've written here is arguably much better than what used to be at the T-Money (rapper) article (which is currently a redirect, but its former contents are viewable in the history, or with this link: [3]) If you can read over that discussion and let me know how T-Money qualifies for an article per the WP:MUSICBIO guidelines, I'd be happy to approve. Thanks for the message! Utopes (talk / cont) 06:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Utopes! Thanks a lot for your help. I appreciate you taking the time to compare my edits to the previous text that was created for T-Money in 2016. Looking at the discussion in the articles for deletion, I can tell that a huge concern was the absence of reliable sources. Furthermore, user Innisfree987 was trying to get in contact with the editor to help improve the page before it was deleted, but it seems they were not able to get in contact. I'd like to quote user Innisfree987, "Certainly if editor or others come back to work on it and can provide more sources, then great. Working with Dr. Dre and MTV on hiphop in the '80s is potentially a very important piece of music history; we just need the WP account of it to meet verifiability standards." I agree that the original Wikipedia article for T-Money was poorly written by a first time Wikipedia editor. As a first time editor myself, I initially thought all the article needed was more sources. Through the feedback of my peers, such as yourself and those at Teahouse, I realized the cadence and the integrity of the sources needed work as well. I also agree that T-Money's contribution to 80s hip-hop is rather significant to hip-hop history as a whole, especially since Original Concept was an early group signed to Def Jam. And outside of his group, he made a name for himself through hosting Yo! MTV Raps. I believe that T-Money qualifies for his own article because he meets numbers 1 and 10 of the guidelines. The sources I included in my draft are much stronger and more credible than the sources that were included in the 2016 draft. I am eager to hear your thoughts, @Utopes! Thanks again! Taevchoi (talk) 21:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there @Utopes! My intention is never to rush you as I know we are all busy with our lives offline, but I wanted to flag my reply above in case you missed it! Thanks again and looking forward to discussing with you. :) Taevchoi (talk) 04:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Hello, Utopes,

I just wanted to share a comment with you about pages like Siege of Ani (1124). Admins patrolling the CSD categories are much more likely to take swift action on requests like this if, using Twinkle, you select CSD>G6 Move and then in the field, you put the name of the page you want moved. Then the admin can check out the page, make sure the move is appropriate and then, with one edit, delete the redirect page and move the draft/article. I can't speak for all admins but I think they are less likely to delete a valid redirect so that another editor can move the page. I realize that to an editor, it may not seem any different from having another editor move the page. I'm just sharing what I've seen happen with G6 CSD requests like this. Thanks for all of the work you do! Liz Read! Talk! 06:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Hey Liz, thanks for the message! I believe there may have made a mistake in that box at first. Initially I put in Draft:Siege of Ani into the Twinkle field, but then I quickly realized that I needed to add "(1124)", which is what I did in a follow-up edit a few seconds later. I was actually curious about what had occurred there, because an hour after I tagged Siege of Ani, I did the same with Draft:Tourism in Tripura in prep for an AfC move. That time the draft title had no issues, and it was quickly processed by 78.26. I suppose my question then is does fixing a wikilink in the CSD tag show up on the admin side of things? Visitng the page now, the G6 Move tag in question still has Draft:Siege of Ani (1124) linked, but that would've happened only after fixing the mistype. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help me

Can you help me to edit my draft Omiddefuri (talk) 08:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

reviewing

Thank you for quality articles about chemistry, from creating such as Nitrosyl perchlorate to FA plans for Chromium, for disambiguation pages and redirects, for reviewing on a large scale, be it articles for creation or GA nominations, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2919 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Wow! Thank you so much for the recognition! Reviewing usually goes under the radar compared to the people who do the writing, so this means a lot. I guess this is motivation to keep working on improving article quality then ^^ 😅. The Chromium FA might be quite far into the future; I feel it might be better to get some practice with a GA here or there in the meantime, which all-in-all might be months or years. I'll do my best though! Utopes (talk / cont) 00:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Adidas Top Ten

Hello Utopes. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Adidas Top Ten, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: @DrowssapSMM, Justlettersandnumbers, Pppery, LeDroider, Voorts, Bruxton, Deb, and Utopes: Please see User talk:DrowssapSMM#Speedy deletion declined: Adidas Top Ten and the draft article itself: "Submission declined on 2 March 2024 by Deb". I'm quite obviously WP:INVOLVED here, and will not particpate in any action requiring WP:ADMIN privileges. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shirt58: It was declined due to a lack of adherence to NPOV on 2 March, and not for notability. The NPOV issues, in my eyes, have since been fixed. I tagged it for CSD in preparation of moving this to mainspace, and in the discussion you linked me it seems as if someone had previously attempted to do the same as well, although that was before the 2 March decline. The article has improved since then. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Eli Hass decline

Thank you for your help with the article Jeffrey Eli Hass, which you declined. I am new to authoring, as you could probably tell. I have made the improvements you suggested and resubmitted. In the Awards, etc. heading, I have located and cited secondary sources. I have also removed external links to from the body. Once I am able, and the article is approved, I will likely move it to the title "Jeffrey Hass" (remove middle name) as this is what the composer's music and recordings are published under and at the moment, there are no disambiguation issues. Please feel free to make other suggestions you believe can improve the article. Snackwell122 (talk) 16:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ossama Kamal is declined

Hi @Utopes, thanks for reviewing my article about Ossama Kamal, the Egyptian TV host.

I'd like to let you know that all references are well established news platforms in Egypt, in addition to links of his own companies and Expos.


In addition, I've added a new reference, which is a YouTube link to a TV interview, where he was the guest, and talked about his background, education, and career, so all info in the article could be verified by his own interview. Abdoelmallah (talk) 12:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

It was not on my bucket list but regardless of the outcome, thanks for recommending me for the autopatrolled permission. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Database reports/Top new article reviewers

Figured you might like to know you're beating the bot for weekend redirect reviews, and it isn't even close. Rusalkii (talk) 19:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis

Hello Utopes,

I understand that you reverted my edit on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. However, what I only partially understand is that all the content from the former article is already included in the current "Multiple sclerosis diagnosis" entry, so why should it be controversial to delete the old lemma? Tobiasi0 (talk) 07:39, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star San draft fixes

Hi Utopes,

Thanks for the feedback at Draft:Star_San. I believe I have addressed the issues and would love it if you can take another look at it! Driftybiscuit (talk) 20:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clorinda (Once Upon a Time)

Have you see my proposed solutions?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I declined my own draft

I declined my own draft guys!!!Visnalize (talk) 07:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Hello, I saw you nominated many redirects I created for deletion. If the creator's desire is enough to procede, feel free to delete them all since I support that decision. Thank you and I apologize for any inconvenience. 7szz (talk) 01:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS. for context: I'm no longer active or interested, and wish I could delete my account and change the visibility of all my edits but that's unfortunately not possible. Those redirects are not useful. 7szz (talk) 01:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please undo this AFC

You created a whole ton of redirects following the request here even though there is no confusion. These all violate WP:R3. Please delete them all.

A tag has been placed on [[:SpaceX Transporter / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporter / Falcon 9 Transporter / Transporter (SpaceX) / Transporter (Falcon 9) / Transporter (SpaceX Falcon 9) // SpaceX Transporter mission / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporter mission / Falcon 9 Transporter mission // SpaceX Transporter missions / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporter missions / Falcon 9 Transporter missions // SpaceX Transporters / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporters / Falcon 9 Transporters]] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by [[:SpaceX Transporter / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporter / Falcon 9 Transporter / Transporter (SpaceX) / Transporter (Falcon 9) / Transporter (SpaceX Falcon 9) // SpaceX Transporter mission / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporter mission / Falcon 9 Transporter mission // SpaceX Transporter missions / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporter missions / Falcon 9 Transporter missions // SpaceX Transporters / SpaceX Falcon 9 Transporters / Falcon 9 Transporters|visiting the page]] and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ergzay (talk) 22:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The list these redirects target includes multiple SpaceX transporters. I don't understand why these would be implausible typos or misnomers if they're actively discussed in depth at the page in question. I'm currently eating dinner so I'm open to discussing this more later, but if your only statement is: "there is no confusion, these violate R3" when the missions are indeed called "Transporters", then I'm not quite sure why these are tagged, as you haven't (seemingly) explained what & how they violate R3. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, these titles have all existed for nearly 4 months now. Plausibility out of the way, these can't even be considered recently created by R3's definition due to Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#cite note-recent-14. I'd recommend you undo your speedy tagging, and/or bring these to WP:RFD if you feel there's a more suitable outcome for these titles. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say they still count as recent given that it's unlikely anyone has seen them until now and nothing was linking to them. Ergzay (talk) 02:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly not "no links" as you've pointed at the AfC page that created them. A redirect-requesting service, which received thousands of pageviews across the weekspan that the SpaceX titles were listed front and center. At the bare minimum, there was one person to request, one person to accept, and one person to archive, and likely 30 other editors that saw this and let it be. R3 points to "leniency for areas that don't get a lot of attention" (so maybe 3-4 weeks instead of ~2-3). The only page on Wikipedia dedicated to creating new redirects would be the opposite of this. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misread what I wrote. I didn't reverse my point anywhere that nothing links to them. I still maintain that. Ergzay (talk) 03:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is linked in the AfC archives and shows up on the "what links here" page. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I opened a discussion on WP:RFD, in a non standard method because of the page quantity. Ergzay (talk) 02:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks to be 14 redirects. That's definitely doable for one discussion. Participating in an RfD without being able to see the redirects at the getgo is a major hassle. It would be preferred to just link them all, following the instructions set at WP:RFDHOWTO. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They all link to the same thing and they're visible in the AFC link title. Ergzay (talk) 03:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to do it, but someone who watches RfD definitely is (going to list all of the pages individually), and that's if they don't just close the discussion outright for being broken. According to WP:RFDHOWTO, you are required to put an RfD notice on the pages of all redirects involved (which you haven't done), as well as notify the talk page of the target article that the discussion is taking place (not done). The Twinkle gadget makes this process incredibly easy, and I'd highly recommend you do this before it inconveniences an uninvolved RfD patroller. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is a "Twinkle gadget"? Ergzay (talk) 03:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how you sent me this CSD notification, usually that gets semi-automated through Twinkle, but you're able to configure it at WP:TWINKLE. After doing so, there's a button that shows up at the top of the article (next to the edit button) that lets you nominate that page for deletion without having to manually paste templates. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just wrote the template into the post, as most people do AFAIK. Never even heard anyone mention this Twinkle thing before nor have I seen it in any guide or tutorial. Ergzay (talk) 03:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you found it! If I had to estimate I'd say that 95% of all tagging done in 2024 is through Twinkle, and basically 99% of all XfD discussions now. Twinkle also does user-talk tags too with the same level of ease. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are not called "Transporters" in any source I have seen nor in any of the articles. Perhaps the only one that seems like maybe I can undo it on is the SpaceX Transporter missions page. Anything with "Transporters" in the name is definitely out. Ergzay (talk) 02:28, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Listed at the DAB as Transporters-1 through Transporter-15, and linked accordingly. Decided to test the hypothesis by splitting the middle and searched externally for "Transporter-8"; all Google search results were for the SpaceX mission. "Transporter" is mentioned at the target 40+ times, and never in context of transporting a vehicle, but the context was instead the name of this mission series. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly any ending in "Transporter" are wrong for the same reason as for example "Falcon 9 Transporter" implies a vehicle that carries Falcon 9. Ergzay (talk) 02:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If "Transporter" is featured at the target in a manner that doesn't involve carrying a vehicle (which still seems to be the case), then this isn't a problem. I don't believe there's any encyclopedic content about a "Falcon 9 carrier vehicle" on Wikipedia, so in absence of this, the Transporter series remains as the primary topic for this redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's just complete retroactive self-justification... The links are actively confusing in their titles. As you mention, the name is never used in reference transportation of Falcon 9, which means keeping redirects around that imply exactly that is a bad idea. As you mention in your previous comment "Transporter" is always linked to "mission". I have never seen the word Transporter used without the word "mission" attached to it or some word meaning a rough equivalent. Ergzay (talk) 03:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that "Transporter" is the name of the series, never said that it's always linked to mission, that just happens to be the context its in and therefore doesn't conflict with a hypothetical carrier vehicle. I'd rather save this part for the RfD once it gets up and running. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Transporter missions" would be the series. Ergzay (talk) 03:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The series seems to be Transporter-1, Transporter-2, etc. The series of missions could apparently be called the "Transporter" series. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

... for successfully nominating me for autoprotrolled rights. That sparked my interest in actively editing again. — Knightoftheswords 18:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Utopes,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfD Question

Hello Utopes,

I noticed you were adding RfDs for pages redirecting to "Never Gonna Give You Up". It made me think: What about We live, We love, We lie? Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 00:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Utopes&oldid=1218240837"