User talk:Dawnseeker2000/Archive 10

Originally, the X-XII titles were slightly smaller than the I-IX titles if you compare them. These edits are to make them more consistent.

Just the rationale. 8.40.151.110 (talk) 21:37, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I understand, but I didn't see a difference in the text when I looked side by side. Dawnseeker2000 21:43, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah. I can see why it would be easy to miss. I guess I'm a perfectionist and it stuck out like a sore thumb, so I went ahead and edited it. 8.40.151.110 (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Roger that, thanks. Dawnseeker2000 22:09, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

List of earthquakes in Canada

Please discuss your removal of sourced earthquakes from this article. There are no specific criteria established for this article other than it being a list of earthquakes in Canada. Furthermore, there is no Wikipedia requirement that any content in an article be notable of itself. You previously raised this issue on the article talk page and did not get consensus. Meters (talk) 22:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed your addition of the quideline on Earthquakes list, but I'm not sure that a guideline that was written by one person and really has not been touched since has any consensus behind it. Meters (talk) 22:53, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

The guideline makes good sense, but it is specifically the notability criteria for standalone articles about notable earthquakes. It should not be applied to a list of earthquakes without prior discussion. Meters (talk) 23:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

have no idea what you are talking about

have no idea what changes you are even talking about — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.23.147 (talk) 21:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Dawnseeker2000. You have new messages at Talk:Timeline of Kobe.
Message added 09:03, 14 September 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asking help to review this article

hello , I am begginer in wikipedia, I hope you could review this article and give me feedback to enhance my skills https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joseph_Zyss — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdalla Dabdoub (talk • contribs) 17:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Messina Earthquake Article

While I appreciate your zeal in dealing with possible vandalism, I find it incredible that you didn't even bother to check the changes I made to the Messina Earthquake Article. Yes, I deleted two periods because they were typos. You even stated you noticed as much but thought of reverting it anyway. The fascinating thing is double checking it would have taken you LESS time than the time you took to revert the changes, and then post on my talk page. I've been living in this address for less than two years now, so if the IP has a ban on it that's beyond me. STILL not a reason enough to revert without actually checking what I did, which was just try to improve the damn article.

People like you are what keep me from wanting to become involved with Wikipedia. Why bother noticing errors on a random article you found interesting and wanting to improve the experience for anyone, when you get ham fisted approaches such as this. God forbid the poor sod who lives here next if they develop an interest in Wikipedia and ever dare try and make a helpful edit.

But fine, keep the article as is then, I will be refraining from making any further changes to any Wikipedia page lest I bump into the likes of you again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.109.112 (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2017‎ (UTC)

Circular

Is a foreign wiki really circular when it's in External links? I doubt it, it isn't being used as a source. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Have I done it Correctly?

Hello, I have recently got your message and did what you told. Could you briefly check if I've done it correctly as I would like to properly do things. Thanks ChrKLO (talk) 13:33, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Some of the fields in the ref template (cite news) aren't necessary, but that looks fine. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 13:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I autism i did not nothing on arricle mount agung

Hi I am autism I good type but thing is didn't do anything wrong on page Mount agung wiki page it is reader please I didn't do anything wrong GAJJR (talk) 21:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Donald trump timeline and 1843 guadeloupe earthquake

Hi I not try taking personality on Donald Trump timeline and 1843 Guadeloupe earthquake page they will understand read and I am skill I am learning please accept it thank you

GAJJR (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Final warning

Hi dawnseeker I am Glen I am autistic I got your message from you about final warning I didn't vandalism on 1843 Guadeloupe earthquake I fix it problem on page, I check this page this morning someone fix in page so I didn't vandalism page so please accept it, thank you. GAJJR (talk) 17:24, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

broken awb script

Your recent AWB script edit broke two cs1 templates and added the page to Category:CS1 maint: Date and year. When a cs1|2 template holds a |date= parameter, it is almost always unnecessary for the template to also hold |year=. Please fix your script so that it does not add extraneous |year= parameters to cs1|2 templates.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:54, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Titan

I added content to the Titan page but you’ve removed the information even though it is true and valid I could get a source if you wanted me to but I feel it’s not vandalism SamC123 (talk) 23:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hussein of Jordan

Hello, Dawnseeker2000 – I understand your wish to correct spelling errors at Hussein of Jordan with this edit, but I am in the middle of copy-editing the article in response to a request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. I had placed a "GOCEinuse" tag at the top of the article that is still there. Because I am busy in real life, I do a few sections each day, so it will take a few more days for me to finish. If you don't mind, I would appreciate it if you would wait until I have placed the GOCE template at the top of the article's talk page before you make additional edits. If you enjoy copy-editing, perhaps you'd like to participate in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, if you are not already active in the project. Best regards,  – Corinne (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, apologies for that. AWB normally advises when there is an "in use" template in the article. I only do runs through that series of articles every couple of months so you won't have to worry about any more incursions on that one. Thanks for letting me know, Dawnseeker2000 22:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

November 2017

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at User talk:83.51.66.57, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Histalia (talk) 17:56, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Histalia, please be cautious about the overzealous use of warning templates. A 4im template should only be used in the most extreme of circumstances. Removing a copyright violation notice is not considered vandalism. Thanks.

UPDATE: I took a look at the interactions between you and 83.51.66.57; their edits were not copyrighted in the first place, so Dawnseeker was justified in the initial removal of the warning template. Primefac (talk) 18:03, 6 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

I'm striking out the user warning, as it's added by an indef'ed user, most likely a sock of Joaquinito01. The user is known to add bogus user warnings and AIV reports, as well as falsely reverting other users' edits. -★- PlyrStar93. _{→Message me. ←} 19:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

List of earthquakes in 2017/Talk

You removed my new entry because of WP:DNFTT? What was wrong with it?--193.163.223.192 (talk) 00:59, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

You just removed my mag 5 quake from the Irish sea...not impressed it's recorded on the data available...I have a buddy on a rig near the area — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.120.141.182 (talk) 18:08, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Me?--193.163.223.192 (talk) 03:12, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

ISC event #'s

Hi! So what do think of a project to add ISC event numbers to earthquake articles? Several ways of how that could be done; see 1957_Mongolia_earthquake#External links for one form. I've also added a link at Template:M/doc#Data_sources to the ISC's nice chronological index that should make getting the links fairly easy. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:56, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, that entry looks good. I hadn't realized that those entries contained lists of potential sources, so yes, we should do totally do that. I can imagine having those present in the articles could be pretty handy. Getting ahead of myself here, but once we have the format settled we may be able to have a bot add individual entries (a template?) to the articles. One other thing that you mentioned earlier was the need to look at how lists are constructed and one of the things that has come up in that area that I've been thinking about is barriers to entry (or inclusion criteria). Have you considered that at all or would you be willing to write a guideline? Dawnseeker2000 04:09, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

"Barriers to entry" doesn't sound good, not all, but presumably you mean "inclusion criteria". Such as those at WP:WikiProject Earthquakes/notability guidelines, right? (And discussed more extensively here.)

Do they need more tweaking? A discussion for that could be opened there, though I see the WP:WikiProject Earthquakes is semi-active. The one suggestion I would make right off the bat is to number the criteria, to facilitate references to them. Perhaps after reviewing them for adjustments. Yes, perhaps it's time to review that.

The "Of scientific interest" is readily verified by a bibliographic link (as I added for the Mongolia quake). I should emphasize the ISC has two kinds of event-specific links of interest to us. First is the technical page, with *everyone's* data (including the USGS), and as "official" a determination as can be had as to time, location, and magnitude. The second kind of link is with the bibliographic data. As far as I know, that is as complete as we could ever hope for, and absolutely (I tend to avoid that word, but there it is) the starting point for anyone, editor or reader, that wants to dive into the deeper, more aracane aspects.

In that the ISC catalog includes pretty much every quake of possible notability, I think an event link to the ISC ought to be mandatory. But before proposing that I would like to sort out some details, like which kind of link, and how to present it.

As to where to include the link: in the earthquake info box, for sure. Also in the tables. (And Wikidata??) But prior to proposing any of that I think we should scatter these links widely so other editors can see what they are and why they are good.

I'm running behind schedule, but will try to set up some examples for display "real soon". ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:42, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

No comments??

For comparison, here are some sample ISC links (as mirrored at IRIS):

• "On-Line Bulletin
• Online Event Bibliography
• Bibliography with parameters, and station reports

For the bigger events there are a LOT more station reports (often every reporting network in the world), and usually more scientific reports. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

OK, as much as I've used the ISC's spreadsheet catalog, I actually haven't looked at their online bulletins much. In fact, when I initially looked at the bibliography for the first time, I thought that it was one of the bulletins with additional information. Anyway, I'll leave it up to you for formatting. I don't really have a preference (my external links are usually the link title followed by an endash and the source linked internally). Hope your holiday was great. Dawnseeker2000 22:40, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

So how do you feel about getting a campaign together to add ISC links generally? Also, should we start a discussion on reliable sources for earthquake magnitudes, and perhaps re-open the question of what earthquakes should be included? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Adding the ISC links is fine (choose a format & I'll follow your lead). Adding them to articles where the ISC is already a source (or where the new link doesn't contradict the stated magnitude) seems to be a good place to start. And yes, I've asked at least one editor to not use earthquake-report.com, so having a discussion to point to might be a good idea (same with having a guideline for which events shouldn't be included). Dawnseeker2000 21:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I've been taking a comprehensive look at the broader situation, and how various pieces might interlock, so I can present a well-developed plan for discussion. (I rather doubt many editors would be interested in detailed discussion.) Meanwhile, I think progress can be made on a template for adding ISC links. A question for you: which of the following general forms of the descriptive text do you think would be best (where brackets indicate links):

A: Technical data and bibliography at the [International Seismological Centre], [event #99999].

B: The [International Seismological Centre] has technical data and a bibliography for [this event (#99999)].

And hoping the creeks don't rise, etc. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hot off the press! The new template {{EQ-isc-link}}:

• {{EQ-isc-link|0389808}} →

The International Seismological Centre has a bibliography and/or authoritative data for this event.

• {{EQ-isc-link|0}} →

The International Seismological Centre will have authoritative data for this event in due course.

I think we can start plugging this into all of the articles of earthquakes of the last 50 years, perhaps since about 1900. (I haven't checked how complete the event pages are.) ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Cool, I'll start plugging away. Dawnseeker2000 02:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Agnew

I understand. Thank you. Red Director (talk) 01:44, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Dawnseeker2000. As one of Wikipedia's most experienced Wikipedia editors, Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 01:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Dawnseeker2000. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

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

Request for discussion at Talk:Vermont

Thank you for your interest in editing the article, Vermont. Could you look in on a question on the talk page at Talk:Vermont#Choice of verbiage and give your thoughts and opinion? Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 14:12, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Heads-up re one of your AWB edits

Hello, while doing some link-fixing, I noticed that this edit of yours] to Parvomay back in March replaced "[[earthquakes]]" with "[[s]]". Just letting you know in case you think there might be other instances of this problem. Graham87 13:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey Graham87, I remember that AWB run well because of how tedious it was. I checked the article again a little bit ago and made a few more improvements. Thanks for stopping by to let me know. Dawnseeker2000 17:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Dawnseeker2000. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

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

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Bitcoin brackets

Hi, Dawnseeker2000. I stared at those brackets for the longest time, and the full stop threw me off. Thank you for the save. D'oh! I really appreciate it. Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:54, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

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

Outreach and Invitations:

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

New Year New Page Review Drive

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

General project update:

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

---

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

I only did an edit of spelling which there are MANY spelling errors.

I saw you left a message on my page. On the article, you said I edited that was put back to the original there were lots of spelling and grammar errors I fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdbag (talk • contribs) 16:34, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from Canada's Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Reviewing

Hello, Dawnseeker2000. AfC submissions Random submission 3+ months 3,303 pending submissions to update I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged. Would you please consider becoming an Articles for Creation reviewer? Articles for Creation reviewers help new users learn the ropes of creating their first articles, and identify whether topics are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Reviewing drafts doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia inclusion policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After requesting to be added to the project, reviewing is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the reviewing instructions before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 03:11, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

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

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

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

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

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

---

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

1906 San Francisco earthquake

what is your problem with improving documentation about the narrative of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, that you blindly remove references ? 64.175.41.17 (talk) 02:50, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

all earthquakes are yours ? 64.175.41.17 (talk) 02:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) IP, the addition of 30 citations for one simple sentence is highly excessive. We do not need to cite every possible mention of a subject; citations are meant to support statements made in the encyclopedia, and if you can't support the statement with one or two citations either it should be split into multiple, separately sourced statements or you're doing it wrong. In this case, I think it's the latter. General Ization ^Talk 02:57, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't think I could have said it better. For the newbie: you can see our guideline on the matter at WP:CITEKILL. Dawnseeker2000 04:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Baseball in Dominican Republic

Hey, I'm still new to the Wikipedia editing community. I was wondering why you reverted my edits on Baseball in Dominican Republic.

Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.147.148.11 (talk) 15:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Vladimir Bibikhin

Hi, I see you reverted an editor for this article. The editor was Karel Kay. Why are you reverting his stuff. scope_creep (talk) 17:18, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, this user is part of one of the most prolific sock farms I've ever seen, with vandalism and trolling as their MO. Dawnseeker2000 17:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Your work on earthquake articles are great. Keep it up, dude. Thanks.

Alex of Canada (talk) 19:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1898 Mare Island earthquake

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1898 Mare Island earthquake you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Not a sock puppet

So you deleted my section on your talk page (fair play I suppose as that other users comment was a little odd), but I'd really like to get a little more info than that. I notice you rolled back some of my changes but not all. In all honesty I can't differentiate between the ones you did and didn't. It's confusing and I can't work out how anyone can get on this platform if this is how it plays out. It seems if you are new and make an edit you are a sock puppet. That's limiting at best.

After some research I edited the Erika Sutter page today. Minor factual change, and added a citation that was previously missing. Just thought I'd let you know.

Before I raise a dispute, could you possibly engage with me a little more positively? As I am not a sock puppet and I am not intending to go away or start a new account. I'd rather engage positively and align myself with the platform. Carlton25 (talk) 12:46, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate the change of heart. I'd like to put back in other factual changes I had researched as well on other pages that you reversed, but note your point below about too many small grammar edits not being overly helpful in the long run (so I won't look to reinstate every minor change). I also agree with the user below about Wikipedia prompting new users to start small. Please let me know if you disagree with anything I do on my talk page or the article pages and I'll be happy to explain or discuss. Thank you. Carlton25 (talk) 12:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Paupa New Guinea Earthquake

Okay, so concerning my edit to List of earthquakes in 2018, how does the IX intensity not sound reasonable to you? USGS states it here. If I have a reliable source, it is reasonable. HurricaneGonzalo | Talk | Contribs 17:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh nevermind, I just realized I wasn't looking at the ShakeMap. I am sorry, so carry on and have a nice day! :) HurricaneGonzalo | Talk | Contribs 17:32, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks. And just to clarify about the user generated content on the "Did You Feel It?" system: The claims that this M6.4 shock were felt in Lae (374 km, about 230 mi) with the extraordinarily high intensity of IX (Violent), is definitely not reasonable. Dawnseeker2000 17:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

109.255.104.181 - BLPCAT problems

Hello Dawnseeker2000, just fyi: apparently the disruptive edits from this IP are still ongoing despite your latest warning on User talk:109.255.104.181. I don't know enough about the history of this problem, so I'll leave it to you if further action is needed or not (I have reverted both recent cat changes). Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

All good. I've been watching the 25 IPs or so this Dubliner uses for over a year. Thanks for checking & enjoy the rest of your weekend. Dawnseeker2000 01:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Dhanyee Meye edit removing off-topic content

Hi Dawnseeker2000, I removed some irrelevant content from Dhanyee Meye, which is a page on a Bengali film. You enabled a rollback which re-added this content (discussing an insulin problem). I really do believe the paragraph I removed is entirely off-topic for that page, unless I've misunderstood something. Would it be alright to reinstate my edit? Thanks and regards. Pepperlab (talk) 11:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

After further reading, I believe the content I removed is an ad placed by GlyxgoReview, and has no place whatsoever on that page. Best regards, Pepperlab (talk) 11:53, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Your recent reverts

Could you shed some light on what's going on at Gentrification of Miami? I take it you believe the edits [1][2] were made by socks? — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, those are both throw-away trolling accounts. See your email for a bit more. Dawnseeker2000 03:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

So, when I have been talking about this increased rate of editing on the copy edit-tagged articles, I've used terms like vandalism, trolling, and socking. Those abbreviated terms don't tell the whole story. This text is the first time that I've been able to write more than a few words on what's going on.

These new editors may or may not be improving the articles. There have been plenty of new vandals on those articles. I have several problems with the new editors:

• The number of editors is excessive and unhelpful
• They have zero stake in the long term longevity and validity of WP
• Editing is a novelty to them and they only think they're helping. They do not understand the bigger picture (WP:V, WP:SYN, WP:INTEGRITY)
• Over time, with each new "grammatical correction", the content moves farther and farther away from its original intended meaning and away from being aligned with the sources
• All of this inexperience is hurting WP – we need fewer, more experienced editors working on these articles (more ≠ better)
• Many of the usernames imply they're ESL editors. So the question is: Does it make sense to have people that don't have the best grasp of English copy editing the English WP?

One more thing: This edit only fixed an error that was introduced an hour prior in this edit, which was supposed to have been "edited for clarity and grammar only".

That's all for now. Dawnseeker2000 20:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure what's going on is they created an account so they could write an article, then found out they have to make 10 edits first. From the Wikipedia:New user landing page they are encouraged to make smaller edits first, and they end up picking out articles at the top of Wikipedia:Community portal#Help out. I don't see anything directly suggesting there is a sock farm. Rather it's the high-visibility of the new user landing page that's attracting some misguided newbies and vandals. If we feel this is doing more harm than good (I'm not convinced), then we should bring up this theory at WT:ACTRIAL. It is not fair to treat each newbie as though they were a sock. They should get the same fair chance at editing. All due respect, but I find your comments at User talk:Mpark92 especially uncalled for. We actively encourage new users to make small contributions, not just on the new user landing page, but on all of our other guides geared toward new users. There is no concept of "don't edit here because there are too many newbies". It's a wiki, things are open for a reason. I understand you may feel overwhelmed, and I truly sympathize with that. Fortunately we have a lot of tools and an army of patrollers to take care of the outright vandalism. The occasional good-faith edit that isn't perfect is OK. Most of what I've seen has been a "net-positive", but that's just my opinion (and to be fair I haven't witnessed as much of this as you have). For now, I kindly ask that we not revert any good edits, regardless of any suspicions. If there are only minor issues with an edit, that is otherwise an improvement, consider making the corrections yourself. If a user is editing constructively or at least trying to, they should be rewarded (welcome template, thanks, etc.) and not brushed off as another annoying newbie. Thanks for your understanding! And apologies if it seems like I'm giving you a hard time. I mean only to protect the new users' right to edit and their growth potential. We all start somewhere :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:56, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your quick attention to vandalism on pages related to South Sudan! Mr leroy playpus (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Greetings from Oregon. Thank you, Dawnseeker2000 18:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1898 Mare Island earthquake

The article 1898 Mare Island earthquake you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:1898 Mare Island earthquake for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ceranthor -- Ceranthor (talk) 20:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Advice re IP and vandalism

Hi Dawnseeker2000. I saw you had left a message on User_talk:83.136.45.62 and wondered if you can help. User has put a couple of edits on Ovens, County Cork about Jewish people and I'm worried this is anti-semitic. I've reverted the edits twice, but suspect user will change them back again. If you know the history of this user, is there anything you can advise? Many thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 23:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

That IP is a Dubliner that has been having BLP cat issues for a little more than a year. He started out as 79.97.225.188 (talk · contribs) but when that one was re-blocked for a year he's moved on to other IPs. I'm guessing they're probably internet cafes. The vandalism that you saw from that IP is probably not my guy, who has made thousands of edits (primarily to expatriate categories). That we're seeing two different styles of editing/vandalism reinforces the cafe / library theory. Dawnseeker2000 23:58, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

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

Backlog update:

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

New Year Backlog Drive results:

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

General project update:

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

---

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

Seabee

Thank you for your edit. It is completely beyond me on how to do what you did.Mcb133aco (talk) 21:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)Mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk) 21:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, I suspect Dawnseeker has magical powers. But he's too humble to talk about them.:-) ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:44, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hah, I just thought I probably shouldn't be touting my semi-automated button-pressing abilities. Dawnseeker2000 21:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

ZenCash(Cryptocurrency) New Unreviewed Article

I would appreciate your help to review and cleaning my brand new article. I would really appreciate your expericen and comments to improve it

Regards --Fergus_Manx 00:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpaceMAN (talk • contribs)

New citation templates coming along.

Hi! My new templates reaching developmental maturity, but wonder if you would favor me with your thoughts on a detail that is bothering me. At User:J._Johnson/Sandbox5#USG-ANSS_citations I have several models; I favor the style in #3 and #4, where "ANSS" is credited as the "author", and "Comprehensive Catalog" is the "work" (database). However, I am perplexed on how to handle the title. Strictly speaking it should be the long title used by ANSS (such as "M 8.1 - near the south coast of Honshu, Japan" or "M 6.9 - 1km W of Day Valley, California"), but those are not very recognizable as the quakes more familiarly known as "Kanto 1923" and "Loma Prieta 1989". I prefer using the short form (which is what will be used for the short-cite and the CITEREF), but being quoted implies that is exactly what the ANSS title is. Which they are not. What do you think?

So have two beers tonight, and if the spouse questions that I'll be happy to explain that you are deliberating on an important point of great subtlety. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

OK, will check on what you've done. Gimme a bit though; I'm still in catch up mode. Dawnseeker2000 21:40, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure. Meanwhile, I keep moving forward. I'm finessing the 'title' issue by presenting some options (see {{cite usgs-anss}}, but I'm still interested in your comments. Also: note the year-place order. I think that will be more useful where multiple uses of this template are listed alphabetically. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Good morning @J. Johnson:, I'm going to look at the new template today, though I must confess I'm still mulling over where I can put the still new(ish) Template:M. So you've gotten ahead of me a bit, but that's OK. Anything changed with the new one since you last posted here? Dawnseeker2000 19:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Lots of tweaks, to both the templates themselves, and their documentation. Two of the new templates – {{cite isc}} and {{cite anss}} – provide full citations to the ISC (more precisely, to specific ISC "data products") and the ANSS Comprehensive Catalog. Complementing them are {{short-isc}} and {{short-anss}} that provide in-line short-cites that link to the full citations. All are mostly shaped up, but I am still working on a bug in how the anss pair handle some of the parameters (which breaks the link between them).

So 2A, 2B, and 3C are the ones with issues right now with the line break? Dawnseeker2000 01:04, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh, no, I am quite past that now! What you were looking at (2A, etc.) are the models I used to decide on which template (format implied) to use as a basis. Don't bother with my sandbox page now, go straight to the templates. The issue back then was how handle "title", but (as I explained above) I've sorted that out. The last issue was with link breakage (and quite a vexing problem that was), but that is fixed now. There is one other function to add to {cite anss} to make urls easier to handle, but other than that I think these four templates are ready to roll. I haven't removed the "not ready to use" message yet (or added the categories) as I want to try them out in several articles first (any suggestions?), but Real Soon Now. And I am about to propose some changes to the earthquake infobox.

There is a broad scope of work about to open up. (What were your plans for March? :-) E.g., check this edit at Lists of earthquakes. Earthquaketrack.com only redirects to the USGS-ANSS page, without adding anything of value, so I see no reason not to go straight to the authoritative source. And I think all such instances should be replaced. There are also a lot of direct citations of "USGS" using cite web that could now be better done with cite anss. Plus citing the ISC for magnitudes, as well as lat-long. and UTC date-time.

What do you think of picking an article we could fix up as a demonstration of the new templates? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure, something on the recent side that may be thin on content. Let me have a look around and I'll ping you later. I've got all the time in the world at the moment. Dawnseeker2000 16:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@J. Johnson: Here's a modern event (1995 Neftegorsk earthquake) that might be good to showcase. Dawnseeker2000 19:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I like it. I'll post a notice on the Talk page, and get to work on it. ANSS is a little thin on resource for this one, but no matter, let's just grab another one. Perhaps one of the recent Mexican quakes? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure, whichever one has the most content to work with. Dawnseeker2000 21:07, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

And they are ready for use! (Used at 1952 Kern County earthquake to replace a dead link.) But I think I'll hold off making any general announcement until the demonstration cases are ready. Plus: I have made two proposals at Template_talk:Infobox_earthquake to modify that template, so that might start some busyness for a couple of days. For now: enough WP; perhaps I can get to the store and back before the roads freeze over. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:29, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Charging along! I revised 1995 Neftegorsk earthquake to use the new templates, replacing some dead links in the process. (And in looking around I found that it really is an interesting quake, so I expanded it a bit.) Something I noticed there: all of the PAGER-CAT links are dead (that service has been replaced). Indeed, since the USGS rebuilt their website (2003?) pretty much all of the hazards.cr.usgs.gov urls are gone or empty, and I wonder if we ought identify them all for likely revision.

I also added cite_anss to 2017 Chiapas earthquake, but you probably saw that on your watchlist. And a comment of explanation; watching to see if anyone bitches. Now to work on a list or two. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

OK @J. Johnson: good work. I have been chasing around the PAGER-CAT / EXPO-CAT links for a couple of years and yesterday I relocated them once again here: [3]. Glad to have found it again: it's a compilation of catalogs and in that article it's used as a source for the EM-DAT and NGDC figures. Dawnseeker2000 14:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I see them. I thought I had seen them somewhere, and why couldn't they keep the old urls?? Anyway, I think they discontinued PAGER, and those are just archives. Much better if we replace all PAGER references with ANSS cites. As to NGDC: I see that some editors rely on it, but I don't know how reliable it is. (The result of massive data input and compilation overseen by people watching the quality? Or one office's staffers grabbing what ever they find from disparate sources?) Yet another task I don't have time for. Do we by any chance have a list of people looking for tasks to do?? :-) ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

2018 Peru earthquake

Thank you so much for the feedback. My groupmates are shit and I've been trying to clean up after them. I had no idea that they had been just completely plagiarizing. Again, I can't thank you enough.

Infobox work

I have been working out how to do the changes to {{Infobox earthquake}}. I was wondering if I could have the new fields pickup from the old, but use of the old forms is too inconsistent. So I am going to retain the old fields alongside the new fields, and track usage of the old fields. How do you feel about a big AWB push get the ANSS urls and UTC timestamps, and ISC events? And: would it be worthwhile to have the 'anss-url' parameter work with just the last part, like in {{cite anss}}? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@J. Johnson: Liking the new ANSS template and have been considering this. We can start getting it in place; just need to look at a few possible examples and replace one to get the ball rolling. Dawnseeker2000 02:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

What I have in mind is more narrowly focused on populating the UTC timestamp and ANSS link fields, and possibly the ISC event id, in the new version of the Infobox; this is independent of any use of the other templates. In some cases, where an article already cites the "USGS" (ANSS) it is trivial to go to that page, and scrape off both the url and the "origin time" (already formatted!), and plug them in. Other cases require going to the Significant Earthquakes archive. Similarly for the ISC event. Once the timestamp is in, the "origintime" field can be (should be) blanked. Is that readily done with AWB? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:39, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, of course I'd be willing to go through the articles and apply the changes. I haven't been peeking at your latest work, so will just need to prime myself with the latest gadgets. Dawnseeker2000 20:58, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep you posted of where I am at. When I turn it on I'll do the 2018 quakes, so you'll have examples. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

They're in!! I'm still checking for little details that need attention, and some of the documentation is not fully updated. But you can start using the new parameters. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 05:07, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

---

You're welcome. Though I was kind of hoping no had noticed that teeny little problem. :-0

I've been updating the "historical" (pre-1900) quakes (and somewhat amazed that I keep finding more), and the "doublet" quakes. But I think I'll pass on the other 600+ quake articles. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@J. Johnson: OK, appreciate the tracking you've embedded. Will get to the remainder at some point. Thanks again, Dawnseeker2000 18:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand why me edits were removed. Topic:Syria

I may have added the reference in a wrong format. However, in the infobox template, a [needs update] was showing. I have added a new reference while keeping the data unchanged because in the PDF article (SYRIA 2014 INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM REPORT) issued by the Department of State has stated that religious groups in Syria are as the following: "Sunni Muslims are estimated to constitute 74 percent of the population and are present throughout the country. The Sunni population includes ethnic Arabs, Kurds, Circassians, Chechens, and some Turkomans. Other Muslim groups, including Alawites, Ismailis, and Shia, together constitute 13 percent. Druze account for 3 percent of the population. Christian groups constituted 10 percent of the population before the civil war..." If I did anything wrong, please elaborate. Thanks, and thanks for keeping Wikipedia clean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adeeb tra (talk • contribs) 05:25, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, go ahead and restore your link. Your change left the article with a bad category (Category:Wikipedia articles in need of updating from February 2023). Just remove the update-inline template while you're restoring your edit. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 06:09, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

References

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

• Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

• While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

• The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I was all ready to give you a barnstar for your sustained and tireless efforts against vandalism, but then I realized that you already have one, and, moreover, that this kitten is cuter (and cooler)! Anyway, thank you for your work combating vandals! Have a wonderful day!

— Javert2113 (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Opinion request

Dawnseeker2000, I see you have edited many geology articles so I would like to have your opinion on this renaming proposal: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_April_17#Magmatism_not_igneous_petrolog. Thank you! Mamayuco (talk) 21:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Possible AWB glitch

Have a look at this edit... I think I've fixed it, but you might like to check me. Andrewa (talk) 05:33, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for posting. I had a quick look on my phone while out working, but let me take a closer look tomorrow on my desktop computer. Dawnseeker2000 07:44, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Your Edit

Hi, Im new here.. I see that You have did a recent edit on the Page of Great Power , Please Can you Kindly Fix the Italian sources? Seems that after your edit something has happen. I have talked you Because in Past someone wanted to destroy the Italian sources. Have a nice day!.--AlfaRocket (talk) 21:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

ISC links

Hi, I've been going through updating infoboxes for 21st century earthquakes and came across two (the 2017 Leyte earthquake and the 2017 Central Mexico earthquake) where the isc-event number was wrong - the link gave an event described as "Off south coast of northwest Africa", (which is another way of saying at Lat. 0, Long. 0 I suspect) and "I am sorry but an error has occurred. Please contact the ISC and it will be investigated." Not sure what's going on there, but thought you should know as you added them. Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 20:38, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

OK, I'm usually pretty diligent and check my work, so don't know what happened there. Thank you for fixing it. Dawnseeker2000 21:11, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Mercury Cougar information

The generations listed under Mercury Cougar are wrong - 1st is 1967/68, 2nd is 69/70, 3rd is 71-73, 4th is 74-76, 5th is 77-79, 6th is 80-82, 7th is 83-88, 8th is 89-97. I have seen the80s and 90s broken out even more. MN12 chassis was the last of the rear drive cats. Cougar Club of America and Legendary Cougar Magazine are my sources which I edit and write articles for both. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cougarsman (talk • contribs) 00:06, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Lead of Intelligence

Hello, I ask you simply because your main language is English and because I presume you are "new" to the page Intelligence (personally, I read it too many times, and my brain cannot correctly perceive the pace that the page's text would take for a newcomer, anymore): reading from the start-"Intelligence has been..."- could you please check whether the grammar, pace, elegance, and clearness of the page's lead section are OK for an encyclopedia?
Feel free to suggest changes of any kind...
In advance, thank you very much! Drow (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Pond1991

@Pond1991: seems to be just adding white spaces. Should something be done? Ping me please if you respond, my watchlist is huge. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 14:13, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Mr. Tide rolls left a perfectly-worded message on their talk page this morning, so let's gauge their response to that. Thanks both, Dawnseeker2000 18:59, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

This evening (an hour ago) for me. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 19:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

• Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

• A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

• There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

• Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

• A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

• Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
• The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

• As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
• Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
• Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Foreigner - I Want to Know What Love Is.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Foreigner - I Want to Know What Love Is.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:10,000 Maniacs - Like The Weather.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:10,000 Maniacs - Like The Weather.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nirvana - Lithium.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nirvana - Lithium.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thompson Twins - If You Were Here.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thompson Twins - If You Were Here.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Seabee

You made an edit to the Seabee article that I thanked you for and got a chuckle in return. My contact with other editors has been limited to mostly my being told how I have it wrong. However, a "Special request" was posted to my talk page by the Public Affairs Officer of U.S. Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 11 requesting that I do the Battalion's article on Wikipedia. They had attempted to do it, but ran into COI issues. I accepted the request telling them that I could not tell them how long it would take as I knew absolutely nothing about the unit and would have to do a lot of reading. All of which I did, submitted to Wikipedia, and was accepted. Now, an editor has post a "possible COI tag" on the article for my having done the thing. So, if you have a moment would care to give it all a look. Thank you. Mcb133aco (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2018 (UTC)mcb133acoMcb133aco (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Mcb133aco: Hello again! Yes, I remember our brief interaction a few months ago. JJohnson was the comedian :) I looked over your article but I don't think I can help out. My WP skills are pretty narrow in scope. Dawnseeker2000 06:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your time. 156.99.40.14 (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)mcb133aco156.99.40.14 (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rheas Obsession - Between Earth and Sky (Maximum Tabla Mix).ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rheas Obsession - Between Earth and Sky (Maximum Tabla Mix).ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Blue Oyster Cult - Don't Fear The Reaper.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Blue Oyster Cult - Don't Fear The Reaper.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. ()

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Martika - Toy Soldiers.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Martika - Toy Soldiers.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eddie Murpy - Party All the Time.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eddie Murpy - Party All the Time.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Unexplained number changes

I've seen a lot in the last 2 days liked this one you reverted. I'm leaving the house soon but I'm wondering if they might all be from the same person as they are so similar. I must check my contributions to see if it justifies a CU. Doug Weller talk 07:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Well, you've probably been better than I have keeping up with watchlist activities :) I just wish that anyone that contributes would slow down enough to write an edit summary for their changes. I'm pretty sure if they did that they'd then catch those silly mistakes. And yes, there may be an uptick in the HDI changes to country articles. Thanks DW, Dawnseeker2000 08:16, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello Dawnseeker2000, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

• The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

• There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

• A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

• Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
• If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
• Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
• The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js^(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
• The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget. In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions. MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues. User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page) User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50). User:Primefac/revdel.js(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you. User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link. User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion. User:Evad37/rater.js(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fleetwood Mac - Big Love.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fleetwood Mac - Big Love.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

List of cities by murder rate

At the end you are the one with more time editing in wikipedia, but according to my calculations. For example: Los Cabos Homicide rate per 100,000 is 111.20 (111.1974) which is the result from 365 (Homicides)/328,245 (Population)x 100,000 and so the other changes, in other words, (365/328245)*100000=111.1974 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CESG76 (talk • contribs) 02:21, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

That list has seen quite a bit of vandalism this year so I'm sure you can understand that there will be a sense of wonder when an IP followed by a new account make successive changes. Trust is central to how WP operates. Dawnseeker2000 02:40, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

I noticed your message. Do you have the right to warn and handle that guy? (in the article of 2012-13 premier league table) I highly doubt that it's a robot which is used to constantly vandalize Wiki, because it reverted other's edits so quickly and frequently. 七战功成 02:25, 15 October, 2018 (UTC)

@七战功成:, I placed identical warnings on your talk page and the other anonymous user's talk page. I did not look at the content of the edits, and only wanted to intervene in the back-and-forth editing. If you perceive the other user's edits as vandalism, please report them at WP:AIV. Thanks, and good luck to you. Dawnseeker2000 01:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Journey - Any Way You Want It.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Journey - Any Way You Want It.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Live - Lightning Crashes.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Live - Lightning Crashes.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm using browserstack

they ar a proxy right, so why arnt their ip banned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.200.103.52 (talk) 12:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

More EQ stuff

Hi! How are you doing? I see that the Infobox tracking categories are getting smaller (good work), decided I should knock off a few, too. But now I find out that the USGS has "upgraded" (I would dispute that) their site, and no longer will talk to my browser at the bottom level of ComCat. Sort of reminds of the story of Abe and Zeke getting a t.v. set.

Anyway, as I hit a few of the articles I see other problems that ought to be fixed, but I don't really want to dive in at this time. Which led me to wonder if we should have some kind of tag or flag, either in the template, or as an independent template, which could be used to identify EQ articles needing some work. The idea would be to identify them in another category, with the template allowing a comment for what is needed. What do you think? ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Howdy. Doing fine (ish). Who's Abe and Zeke? Dawnseeker2000 22:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Two guys living so far back in the Ozarks that they didn't have electricity, and so couldn't watch t.v. But then they got this solar-powered t.v. Abe, hooking it up, says to Zeke: "this here antenna is supposed to go on the roof." And Zeke says: "Dang. Now we gotta get a roof." :-( ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:50, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@J. Johnson: no issues with the anss-url field working then? Dawnseeker2000 12:00, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Nah, just the USGS dissing my browser. Though today I'm going to look at a possible problem with 'timestamp' when used with 'pre-1900'. And perhaps clear out some more of the errors back log. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 19:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

A heads up: I have upgraded the Infobox template. It now categorizes doublet earthquakes automatically, so the explicit Category line is no longer needed. (And I am removing them from the articles.) Also, for all cases that are not pre-1900 the "UTC time" label is always displayed, with "??" if there is no value. Documentation next. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Blast from the past...

I drafted a second version of an article on Lucidchart. Then I requested the history of the deleted versions to be grafted onto it. Now I am going through those edits, and I came across one of yours.

It is from three years ago. Maybe you wouldn't make that edit today, or you aren't interested in examining an edit from that long ago.

That would be fine.

But, I have got to say, I am not a fan of the unnecessary rewriting of article's metadata, to alter the esthetic appearance of the articles, in the editor. I think doing so breaks the well-known principle of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". I think there are other strong reasons to resist the temptation to rewrite metadata, that is actually working properly. Looking at what you actually did, it looks like you were rewriting metadata that had been working properly.

But your edit summary said something else. You wrote "move reference elements inline (leaving refs that way does not scale well), WP:TONE"

Well, the references were already inline. The opposite of inline references are list-defined references. Policy is silent on whether contributors should write new references in the one field per line method, or all fields on a single line. While I prefer the one field per line, because it lets the default diff engine show actual changes more clearly, I resist the temptation of rewriting references someone else wrote using my preferred method. I do this because I want to preserve the utility of the default diff engine. I'd prefer that people like you, who prefer all fields on a single line also didn't rewrite references.

For the default diff engine line-ending, linefeeds, are extremely significant. When you find a paragraph that consists of multiple lines, and combine it into a paragraph that consists of one long single logical line, you strongly erode the utility of the default diff engine.

I don't remember ever looking at TONE before. I looked at it when I saw you using it as a justification for your edit, and was perplexed. TONE has to do with article actual intellectual content -- what the articles tell our readers. It has no advice about metadata, yet your edit was almost entirely a rewriting of the article's metadata.

Thanks for reading my concerns with your edit. Geo Swan (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

This is a comment about a 3 year old edit in line with policy that disagrees with your own personal opinion. Please stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.192.134 (talk) 01:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Your recent editing history at Heckler & Koch VP9 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 75.182.115.183 (talk) 21:59, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Please go ahead and file the report. Two people now (JBW95 and myself) have tried to impart to you that the gun exists by adding it as an entry to the article and you are invalidating that with your removal and citing WP:V as your weapon. I'm telling you that you don't need to cite everything. The sky is blue and the H&K VP9-B exists. Please take the rest of the day off and take a walk or something. You're making this a scene. WP has enough of that. Dawnseeker2000 22:22, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I may have hit a nerve on 75.182.115.183. I asked about his "Some of us were editing long before you made your first edit" comment (hah!), and whether he had any history of interest, and he deleted it. Possibly nothing to it. But I do get a sense this character has been around before. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. And yes, he does seem to have some experience, and there's no question that their intentions are good, but my interaction with them on the Heckler & Koch VP9 article shows that they are a bit misguided. They seem to have gotten a case of tunnel vision. By that I mean that they don't have a good sense of the big picture. From their perspective this dispute is about a violation of WP:V, but it is not. Let me explain for anyone passing by.

This situation initiated with 75.182.115.183 mass reverting edits by FJBW95, which included removing a simple one line entry on the Heckler & Koch VP9 article regarding one particular version of the pistol. JBW95 added the content and 75.182.115.183 came in less than a week later and removed it in this mass reversion citing WP:V as the reason. I immediately restored the entry as I knew it was valid, but 75.182.115.183 persisted. I think his actions are a case of tunnel vision (and not for the better of the article as a whole) because there were (and still are) entries about other versions of the pistol that were not challenged. Dawnseeker2000 07:41, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dawnseeker2000. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dawnseeker2000. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Agadir earthquake

I am not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, so I'm not so clear on the rules and etiquette. For several weeks, I've been trying to update the Agadir earthquake article to more accurately reflect the correct epicentre. You keep reversing my edits. Could you substantiate this?Dave agadir (talk) 07:03, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes. First, welcome to Wikipedia. Every article has a history tab that shows each edit that has been made, so if you look at the EQ article, you'll see each instance where you and I changed it. It's considered polite to always use the edit summary (a field where editors type notes that summarize their changes), so when I reversed your changes, I typed in a link to WP:HIJACK, which is an essay regarding edits that change content without changing the source. When this is done, the existing source becomes meaningless. We are all about the sources here ;) Hope that helps. Dawnseeker2000 07:10, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

OK, I don't have access to Utsu. If you do, would you be able to check if the excessive rounding from that source or if it was applied to the data from that source? I can provide alternative sources but they are papers rather than general reference texts (and some are in French) so yours might be better if the correct data is there (as I suspect it might be) and the rounding was applied later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave agadir (talk • contribs) 17:13, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Dave: If you don't have access to a source (such as Utsu) you probably should not be citing it. (The basis for citation is: where did you see the material.) However, no problem, as the preferred authoritative sources for the technical details of earthquakes are the principal catalogs, such as the ISC and USGS-ANSS, which are entirely open-access. As it is, I have revised 1960 Agadir earthquake with your desired changes, and with sources(!), with an explanation at Talk:1960 Agadir earthquake. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Greetings

Hi! I just wanted you to know that I have replied to your message on my Talk Page. And thank you for beginning this discussion. I love the parakeets, by the way! :) P.S. Greetings from Alaska! Juneau Mike (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dream Academy - Life In A Northern Town.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dream Academy - Life In A Northern Town.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Hi Dawnseeker - I have just found your article on the 1976 earthquake in Guatemala. Many thanks! My wife and I, with newborn twins, were at the edge of the quake zone in Belize with feeding bottles falling off the shelf and the house [on stilts] rocking heavily! Viking1808 (talk) 12:58, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Flight numbers

Greetings Dawnseeker! I have noticed that your automated typo corrections include a change from "№" to "No.", for example in this edit. I'm not convinced this change should be applied everywhere. Particularly in spaceflight-related articles, the "№" is quite commonly used, either to denote a flight number, or by following the official denomination for Russian spacecraft. Besides, when "No." appears alone, it could be confused with a negation. Could you possibly remove this change from your default typo-fixing configuration? — JFG ^talk 14:07, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Sure, and should the six changes that have been made (Discovery Program, Falcon Heavy, Kosmos 638, Long March 5, M-V, New Shepard) be reversed? Dawnseeker2000 17:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks. I have restored the symbol manually on those articles. If you see others, please handle them. — JFG ^talk 18:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

1993 in British television

Thanks for finding this. I think as it was a link to the section of the page I was editing I probably copy/pasted the URL from the wrong tab. I've added the right one now though so it should all be good. This is Paul (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

All good. If you find any others that I might need to know about or just goof up, feel free to fix or stop by again. Thank you, Dawnseeker2000 13:41, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charismatic authority, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dominance (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Question about Modification of References on Chess Today article

Hi Dawnseeker2000.

You did some editing of links on the 'Chess Today' article. I hope you don't mind if I pick your brain about it. I noticed that you changed some of the references to google book previews to remove the highlighting. I absolutely trust your judgement in this, but just wondered why. Isn't it easier to see where on the page the information referred to is located if it's highlighted for you when you arrive at that page? Is there a wiki policy which says that having the text highlighted on the page when you arrive at a reference destination isn't acceptable?

Anyway, sorry to be a bother, I just wanted to know for future reference, and if I understand why, I'll probably remember better!

Thanks again,

Imnikrist (talk) 10:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

wp cite removals

Hi, wouldn't it be appropriate/useful/helpful, when you remove a citation that uses wikipedia, to put in place 'citation needed' tag, since the material no longer has a cite? thanks. Anastrophe (talk) 19:15, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello. No, probably not. In many of these situations, a link to the article being cited already exists, and if not I'll add one. Usually, the tidbit in question has a source in the target article, and since the task of verification (from the reader's perspective) comes about by following links, all they'll need to do is follow a link or two. Dawnseeker2000 03:07, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

I suppose, but of course, once you've removed the link to other wikipedia article, that destination with the potential actual citation is "gone", so the article's left with a claim that is now unsourced. Obviously, it's your choice, it's not my place to impose more work on you, that's for sure! Anastrophe (talk) 04:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Past vs Last.

Dawnseeker leads one to feel that "the past couple of years" are the final years of his or her life. Please Check Past vs Last for details. Example: The last that time we saw Dawnseeker's biopage the term " Borderline personality disorder" was used. Though we have seen this in the past we hope it is the last that we shall see of it. Signed by Globalaider and with the best of intentions.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalaider (talk • contribs) 07:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 

RD1 request

You requested a revision deletion for 1883 eruption of Krakatoa. You did not identify the source of the text. I see a lot of overlap with this site, but not the specific passage you reverted. Can you tell me where you found that text?S Philbrick(Talk) 21:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Many apologies. It's this site here: [4]. Dawnseeker2000 22:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Dawnseeker2000, No problem, thanks. RD1 completed. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Persistent petty vandalism

Hi Dawnseeker, I see you're having a little trouble on the article [1889] with a petty serial vandal who uses the public IP address 46.39.51.39. The same user is doing the same thing on the article [1868]: see its recent History. Characteristics: the IP address is in Moscow; the vandalism is petty, pointless and somewhat tedious to detect; it seems to occur twice a day; and warnings are ignored. So it could even be a bot.

I'm not all that familiar with how to deal with this situation; what would you advise? Should we place a joint warning on the creature's talk page first? Of course it's sad there are lonely people like this who have nothing better to do with their lives, but IMHO having to deal with such with kid gloves is tedious; the rules ought to be less tolerant.Ttocserp (talk) 08:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Addendum: I now see this user precisely the same vandalism on [1868] was done by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A00:1FA0:6EF:229D:45B3:2B14:C9AF:2915. Ttocserp (talk)

Thanks for keeping those lists tidy Ttocserp. As you probably already noticed, I put in a request to have them protected, so we'll have a break for about 2 weeks. Dawnseeker2000 00:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

What's up with the universe being like e=mc^(infinite*2) and sometimes 0c/zeta to handle relativity?

Thanks

Thanks! Imnikrist (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

2019 Eastlake earthquake

Hi

My name is glen I am autistic, I got messages from you about eastgate earthquake. I created new article for all people in wiki website. I wouldn't delete article ever you. Please remove delete on 2019 Eastlake earthquake, thank you.

Glen Johnson Jr. GlenAllenJohnsonJr (talk) 01:46, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Wrongful warning to 2603:9000:D710:FF00:8C67:92F5:CF9E:D19

User:2603:9000:D710:FF00:8C67:92F5:CF9E:D19 made an edit on 1953 page in which he/she added the birthday of some author named Charles E Hill. While that author is not a notable person, you are in the wrong for giving the IP adress that warning label. That IP adress has made only one single edit. If a IP adress does vandalism or an edit they are given multiple warnings, usually the first few 2-3 templates given to vandalizers are and

icon. Don't scare away editors like that, assume good faith and not everything is vandalism. In that case it was a good faith edit. --Proudpakistani11 (talk) 09:13, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

We'll have to disagree on this (and that's OK). Dawnseeker2000 22:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Please check your scripts...

You've changed things like:

• March 3–4

to

• March 3 – 4

in year articles.... — Arthur Rubin (talk) 06:22, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Those aren't errors because (quoting from MOS:DASH here) "The en dash in a range is always unspaced, except when either or both elements of the range include at least one space". Dawnseeker2000 07:08, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Interesting interpretation of the MOS. The elements have spaces, but the visible text does not. The obvious interpretation is that the visible text is what is important. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:51, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I see now. At home with a desktop computer. I'm telling you, I've pressed that button so many times without question that that reinforced what I thought I was seeing... Dawnseeker2000 22:45, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The linking seems to be inappropriate except in "intrinsically chronological articles" articles, per WP:DATELINK; but MOS:DATERANGE covers the the spacing, even if MOS:DASH does not. If you still want to talk, I'll try this evening (I'm in PDT, also). — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

We dont need to cover the MoS or who is right or wrong, but I think it will still be worth it, so please go ahead if you can. Dawnseeker2000 02:33, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Well, that was a missed opportunity... Dawnseeker2000 07:36, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

At Davao City, this edit introduced a bunch of strange spaces. For example, the first paragraph includes:

most populous in Mindanao. [9] As of the 2015 census, the city had a population of 1, 632, 991.

The space before [9] is new, as are the spaces in the population number. Might be simplest to revert that edit but others might also need to be checked. Johnuniq (talk) 10:07, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

And Delaware (I'm checking articles with an error tracking category). Johnuniq (talk) 10:09, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I just found a new button to push (that's about all I do on WP these days) and just noticed the things that I have to look for (that are unwanted). The Davao City article was the first that I'd used the button on and have since noticed the oddities. Thank you for being perceptive and being willing to drop by. Dawnseeker2000 10:11, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thanks again, Dawnseeker2000 10:20, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

wikiEd error

You broke coordinates in Elephanta Caves by adding spaces aft the decimal point in a number. Please be more careful. MB 02:57, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Dawnseeker2000 03:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

For those interested: This is not an AWB error. It is a tool within WikiEd. Still getting used to it. Dawnseeker2000 03:41, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

See your edit at Giralda which inserted a space to give |104. 1| which broke the template. Johnuniq (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Done. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 10:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Errors are still occurring. See diff at Lions Gate Bridge. What script is that? Is the script also responsible for changing the spacing in the infobox? Johnuniq (talk) 09:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's described by the WikiEd developer as "Basic – spaces and empty lines". I'll stop using it for now because I need to be extremely vigilant at correcting it. In other words, I need to be running at peak performance in order to make sure that I see what it's done (incorrectly), and right now I just can't because of stress and sleep issues. Thanks for your vigilance and patience. Dawnseeker2000 09:38, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

So that's at WP:WIKED. I suppose I should report the bug there (it should not be changing stuff in a template!) but first some testing to see if clicking that button without using AWB at the same time causes the error. I have no idea how WikiEd can function in the same edit that is tagged as AWB. Johnuniq (talk) 11:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

The tool is supposed to remove spaces after punctuation. And what I'm doing is moving article content from AWB to the browser to use the scripts/wikiEd, then back to AWB for a final review. The problem tool in wikiEd has a semicolon on the button. Thanks for looking into this, Dawnseeker2000 11:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Saint Helena, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Helena (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Undit Revisions

Early Warning Labs is a Federal Research and Development Partner and justified to be mentioned for its participation with the EEW alerting. Proper citations were used and references provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disaster Reindeer (talk • contribs) 07:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I can tell you from experience that that kind of writing will most likely continue to be challenged. Good luck, Dawnseeker2000 08:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

British logistics in the Falklands War

Do not ever attempt to change the variety of English in an article without discussion (WP:ENGVAR), especially not to EngvarB ("variety of English cannot be determined - editor attention required"). Per Template:EngvarB: "An article tagged with one of the specific language templates must never be changed to {{EngvarB}}" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:48, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Help me understand this. I'm using User:Ohconfucius/script/EngvarB.js not to change, but to update the version of English in articles. Where are you getting the "variety of English cannot be determined - editor attention required"? Dawnseeker2000 10:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Never, ever update the variety of English in an article. (MOS:RETAIN) It is always acceptable to change EngvarB to a national variety, but never the other way around. Also, do not run that Java script. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:12, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

This seems worthy of a conversation. I doubt we can communicate what is required with a keyboard. I left my number by email. Please call me. Dawnseeker2000 11:17, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Frontiers is not a pirate journal

Dear Dawnseeker, I have seen that you deleted a link to a Frontiers in Physics article. Please note that FiP is an open-access, peer-reviewed, prestigeous Physics journal with an ISI impact of 1.89. A collegue of mine restored the link. I would kindly like to ask you not to delete it any more. Peter

@Peter.hantz: the link wasn't helpful or needed, and Dawnseeker2000 wasn't the one who undid your edit. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 09:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Dear Nigos,

The paper describes a very simple Gedankenexperiment which enables even high-school students to intuitively understand the precession of heavy tops. Why did you delete it so fast (even without looking in it)? The ground for deletion was that FiP is a pirate journal what is not true.

@Peter.hantz: it appears that Frontiers Media is a potential predatory publisher, which is why MrOllie undone your edit. Besides, it appears to link to a paper you published. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 09:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Indeed I am one of the authors who published the paper. Is this a problem? If my research group finds an easy way to explain precession (it was my sideproject for 20 years) shall we hide it? Are you perhaps a Physicist to judge its value? And may I ask who was that geneious who classified Frontiers as a predatory journal? Frontiers is an open access journal with a prestigeous editorial board and an ISI impact of 1.89. --Peter.hantz (talk) 09:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@Peter.hantz:, the way you put it in the external links section appears as if you were advertising your paper. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 09:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@Peter.hantz: And expanding on that... Yes, it is considered a problem around here because it is usually perceived as promotional for an author to link to their own work. Keep in mind that this is an encyclopedia, yet because of its open access, it is very susceptible to abuse. That is why experienced volunteer editors are on the look out for potential promotion. Dawnseeker2000 09:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

If you do not like it as an external link, would be OK if I write couple of sentences about how it helps to understand precession and I put it as a reference? I am happy to do it.

What citation will you be using? Dawnseeker2000 09:50, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Of course the Frontiers article, the best figures and explanations are there. In order not to be a self-citation, I made my contribution from a new account (Physisc42)

@Peter.hantz: Please read WP:SOCK. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 12:21, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Matteo Vanetta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guardian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:05, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

User:GregU/dashes.js

You may want to stop using the script until they can fix it. It is changing the blue linked time zone UTC−08:00 (see Lumby, British Columbia) to the red linked UTC– 08:00 (see here. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:26, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for that, Dawnseeker2000 11:28, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Apparently it's been doing that for a while, 2015. I can't believe nobody saw it. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 12:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

I noticed a couple other errors in the script. It changed one date apparently in a title (although, actually not; I reparsed it) and removes Dashbot comments. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:01, 11 August 2019 (UTC)