User talk:Valereee

Need help and don't know where to find it? Help!

June 2023

Hello, I'm Aboutnick. I was blocked by you in February of 2023 for "Refusal to communicate, blocking from article space to see if we can get them to start communicating either on talk pages or at ANI". I was unclear on how to communicate with other users via Wikipedia. Therefore, I was rightfully blocked. I now know how to communicate with other users. With that being said, would you please consider unblocking me. Respectfully, Aboutnick

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello Valereee,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

This week's article for improvement (week 29, 2023)

Hello, Valereee. The article for improvement of the week is: Religious philosophy Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Literal translation • Tai chi Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI •

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

• News and notes: Big bux hidden beneath wine-dark sea as we wait for the Tides to go out?

• In the media: Tentacles of Emirates plot attempt to ensnare Wikipedia

• Obituary: David Thomsen (Dthomsen8) and Ingo Koll (Kipala)

• News from the WMF: ABC for Fundraising: Advancing Banner Collaboration for fundraising campaigns

• In focus: Are the children of celebrities over-represented in French cinema?

• Tips and tricks: What automation can do for you (and your WikiProject)

• Recent research: Wikipedia-grounded chatbot "outperforms all baselines" on factual accuracy

• Humour: New fringe theories to be introduced

• Cobwebs: If you're reading this, you're probably on a desktop

• Featured content: Scrollin', scrollin', scrollin', keep those readers scrollin', got to keep on scrollin', Rawhide!

• Traffic report: The Idol becomes the Master

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

re: MIAJudges

Honestly, Valereee, if you get a straight answer out of them on the Garnett edit, that'll be the first one. Between this, their other misrepresentations, the alternate account thing, and now the off-wiki canvassing for their Village Pump proposal, the noise-to-signal ratio is what has me so exasperated. Good fortune getting something beyond another iteration of "This isn't about me!!!" Ravenswing 12:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it's starting to look like a CIR issue, frankly. Valereee (talk) 12:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red 8th Anniversary

	Women in Red 8th Anniversary
	In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

• Suggestion improvements
• Favorite collections tips
• Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

SmallCat dispute case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 4, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 13:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

reply

Hey, Snow Rise, just thought we might as well discuss further here instead of there so that maybe someone can close that discussion as resolved without any action being necessary.

Honestly, I could not disagree more that an admin should just shrug and move on when they encounter someone behaving badly who then then pushes back repeatedly on whether the behavior is even problematic. I consider it part of my job to try to actually fix behavior issues rather than ignore them. And it's part of the job that other admin should be doing, too, and if they don't even recognize the behavior as bad, how can they ever hope to help fix that behavior? He ended up by striking the comment, which is all he was being asked to do in the first place. And maybe having seen enough people thought the behavior wasn't cool was what convinced him to do that, and maybe he'll be more careful in future. So isn't that a win for everyone? And neither of things would have happened if I hadn't brought it to ANI because before that, he still thought he was right.

Snow Rise fixing ping. Valereee (talk) 09:22, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Well look, it's very easy for me to opine on this subject without having the same community obligations that you do as an admin, so take my perspective with a grain of salt. And indeed, I've said things substantially parallel to what you are saying above myself in the thread: I really do think that it's for the better if Steven is taking the feedback there to heart. And certainly do not let me be mistaken for not respecting your decision to intervene to defend the rank and file editor in the first instance: I very much think that was the right thing to do. I just have a hard time imagining myself bringing such a matter to ANI on the basis of an AGF violation that straddled the line between permissible and impermissible observations about the strategic procedural aims of another community member, and that's just the honest truth. But here's the thing: I've never brought anyone to ANI, despite observing some truly ghastly behaviour when it comes to WP:CIV. I just have never taken that step. So quite arguably I am not the person to set the reasonable threshold by.

That said, I do think there are occasions where it might not work out nearly so well as it did here: for example, if the reported party was not, even after the report, willing to reconsider their position even to the extent Steven did here. And instead they embrace an IDHT perspective. And because there is no brightline policy violation, they can't be sanctioned, and perhaps they have a personality type that causes them to walk away from such an exchange feeling emboldened to continue to speculate on the motivations of other editors, and argue the rhetorical opposition rather than the point. But I'll grant you that is a speculative scenario versus at least one real one which turned out alright with your course of action, so you are entitled to be satisfied that you pursued the right course of action here if that is how you see it.

Even so, I do have one more point I should like to share: I said what I said not just because I believed it was valid reasoning/an honest appraisal of what I would and would not do in the situation, but also because when summarizing a dispute, it is helpful to point out factors that favor and disfavor various parties / initial responding community members, if you can do so without being disingenuous: it helps to demonstrate that no one is ever really a perfect party in such discussions and helps parties feel less besieged and more willing to try to see where they might have altered their own conduct if they don't feel all the blame for the situation landing as it is being heaped upon them. But again, it's super easy for me to do that as both a non-mop and a previously un-involved party evaluating matters after the fact. What you did was within what I would call fair discretion for any community member, and if you feel it was particularly necessary given your administrative obligation, I'm neither properly qualified to argue with my lack of similar positioning, nor inclined to judge your administrative exercise in that respect. SnowRise ^{let's rap} 14:48, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Appeal

Long time no see. Sorry to bother you and sorry about the weird post. I was really frustrated with Wikipedia and I guess I had to take out my frustration somewhere. But I’m trying to appeal my (ancient) topic ban. Do you think [Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Kurds this] was actually ok? You were there. That was just a WP:WITCHHUNT and that's how I got topic banned. I don’t know how that’s ok. Otherwise, I could just go to the administrators noticeboard and find all your bad edits and get you banned. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2023 (UTC)