User talk:Kudpung/Archive Mar 2018

Afc

Hi Kudpung - Good to hear from you, if only tangentially. I hope you are keeping well. I've been doing some AFc'ing for a change and it's proved to be very interesting. But the tsunami of promotional trash that comes through every day! I think Afc is a good process, and the criticisms of it generally unfair. But I don't think it's enough. I suppose Wikipedia's become a victim of its own success - everyone wants a piece of it. I don't know whether it's a ban on paid editing; a bar on articles for companies that are less than X years old, although that won't stop the vloggers, the rappers, the serial entrepreneurs etc.; a three-submissions and you're out rule; or what. But I'm pretty sure it needs something more structural to hold back the tide. But, until then, I suppose we keep plugging on. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, KJP1, I had noticed DGG's encouraging words to you. I wish more AfCers would work the way you do. ACTRIAL seems to be having the desired effect, but it also highlights just how many new articles are paid, spam, or vanity because that's mostly what's left nowadays - after the inevitable soccer players and rappers. Where we still need serious help is having NPPers who are able to recognise undesirable articles for what they are, while keeping the backlog down, but the patrollers tend to be too superficial in their patrolls. While NPR is by far the more important job, too few patrollers accord the same critical attention to articles as some of the AfC reviewers do. It should be the other way round. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

A very good point - I promise I shall get over to NPP and try and get my Pooh-like brain around the technicalities. Now, isn't it past your bedtime in your neck of the woods? It is currently freezing in England and I'm envious. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 19:34, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Help

I added this image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WGC-Mexico_Championship_logo.png to our golf page 2018 WGC-Mexico Championship, and someone keeps taking it down, saying that we don't have the right to use it, when in fact we use hundreds of images like this one to put on the golf related pages. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 11:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Equinix page

Hello Kudpung, I am responding to your message from Feb. 24, 2018, to disclose a COI. I am not an Equinix employee, but my agency does marketing work for Equinix. My interest in editing the Equinix page is to provide historical information about the company. In my most recent edit, I have attempted to remove all language that could be considered promotional. I have used Equinix sources as citations only for undisputed material (e.g., when a deal was announced or completed, the names of its executives, an opinion expressed by an executive, etc.). I am open to feedback and happy to make further adjustments to better conform to Wikipedia standards. Thank you for your note. Signed, Aik0808 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aik0808 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Aik0808 - Glad to hear you are "open to feedback". I've left some on your Talk page. KJP1 (talk) 23:26, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I decided to revise rather than delete, since it is a very important company, and have already made some of the necessary changes; I shall follow up. DGG ( talk ) 00:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Seven years of adminship, today.

Wishing Kudpung a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 22:45, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Gosh, how the time flies! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:01, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

And my own congratulations on your seven years. What a maddening and inspiring place this can be. KJP1 (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, KJP1. On another note (I haven't fully reviewed your editing history), is there any particular reason why you are not an admin? You have bee around a long time and editing consistently for at least the past two years. Yuo might need to do some semi-admin work to bolster your image for the serial oposers, but anyone with a raft of FA to their name would normally already know all there is to know about adminship. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:52, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

You very kindly raised this a couple of years back. Then, I declined, as I didn't think it was for me. Now, I'm reconsidering! KJP1 (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Let me know, KJP1, if and when at any time you think you may be ready to give it a try. Nowadays most RfA of genuine candidates who are bold enough to try generally succeed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Happy adminship anniversary Kudpung! I'd bring cake, but I don't know what flavour you like & (if it ain't chocolate) no guarantees it would make it --TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:43, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, TheSandDoctor. I love chocolate but at my age and weight my doctor won't let me eat it 😕 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

That's unfortunate. Now your cake might not make it (I don't like chocolate). Better custom order a mango cake then (allergic). Will make sure it gets there in one piece! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 02:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Need to Unlock Aiglon College Page

Hello I am working on the Notable Alumni section of Aiglon College's Wikipedia entry (with the school's knowledge and permission). I am ready to start posting but I can't get into the page to make the changes. Please advise. Thanks Louise Aird (former student)LJA123 (talk) 19:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC) LJA123LJA123 (talk) 20:54, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) So since you are editing on behalf of the school, there is absolutely no need to lift the protection on the article. You are a WP:COI editor and should be proposing any edits you wish to make on the article talk page for review by other, non-conflicted editors anyway. You have no business editing the article directly. Wikipedia is not social media. We have very little to no interest in what the school does or doesn't want in this article. Perhaps that is why the page is protected in the first place. We are not a piece of the school's PR plan. John from Idegon (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Courtesy ping @LJA123: --TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

LJA123, please see Wikipedia:Edit requests. Follow the instructions and make your request on the article talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Courses Modules are being deprecated

Hello,

Your account is currently configured with an education program flag. This system (the Courses system) is being deprecated. As such, your account will soon be updated to remove these no longer supported flags. For details on the changes, and how to migrate to using the replacement system (the Programs and Events Dashboard) please see Wikipedia:Education noticeboard/Archive 18#NOTICE: EducationProgram extension is being deprecated.

Thank you! Sent by: xaosflux 20:28, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

A note

I have draftified a page reviewed by you, in light of concerns of UPE raised at this COIN thread.This paragraph in the draft may be of some interest.Regards:) ~ Winged Blades^Godric 13:08, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

See COIN thread. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:07, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Question for the proposed deletion of “Cream Soda with Milk”

Dear Kudpung, In the HK wikipedians’ noticeboard, there is a to-do list, it includes translating the Chinese page for “Cream Soda for Milk” to English. I only translated the content of “Cream Soda for Milk” to English directly, may I ask in which criteria can I improve?

Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk) 06:43, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Abelmoschus Esculentus, the only way you can do this is to make sure it meets our criteria for NOTABILITY and expand it so that it becomes a useful encyclopedia entry. If that's all there is in the Chinese Wikipedia, it should probably be deleted there too.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:52, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Here is the link, there are no references: https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/zh-hk/忌廉溝鮮奶 Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk) 07:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Abelmoschus Esculentus, the article for this subject on Chinese Wikipedia is basically a stub with page issues since 2008. Having an entry there is irrelevant. Like Kudpung said, this entry needs to be expanded; I noticed there are some coverage of this drink by Chinese news outlets, so you can start with those (it's okay if the sources are not in English as long as they are reliable sources). Alex Shih (talk) 07:13, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Bbarmadillo declaration

Hi Kudpung, I got your message. Not much to confide, apart from a message I rceived from Bbarmadillo, which stated Please help me, which is odd. When I saw it, I went to his page for an explanation and left a message. I don't know why he contact me in particular, apart that I have started the process to delete to a lot of his articles. In my general makeup, Kudpung, I'm to right of Genghis Khan when it comes to defending Wikipedia. Did you see the number of [WP:PAID]] declarations he has? I've not see that before, the sudden change of heart. COIN seems to be having an measurable effect. scope_creep (talk) 11:17, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

What is YGM? scope_creep (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm the middle right now of checking through his paid articles. We have another KDS4444 on our hands. Perhaps worse because KDS had made some genuine contributions before he was smoked out and finally got blocked and banned. IMO every attempt possible should be made to delete Bbarmadillo's paid articles. This will force him to refund his clients' money and be a lesson for anyone else contemplating using Wikipedia for profit. 'YGM' means You've Got Mail. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:31, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I dont see that from the evidence so far that it will happen. I think at most two to three out of the fourteen are delete candidates. The thing that worries, is that you end up seeing the pattern when the paid crowd write articles, which are decently constucted, self declare and then the articles are left, and the behaviour is rewarded. It's a kind of anti-behaviour. scope_creep (talk) 17:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

It probably won't and and my comment was an opinion, not an attack. However, the articles that are sold by paid editors are never strictly necessary ones and Wikipedia would not be any poorer without them. The catch-22 is that if they are proven to meet GNG, we have to keep them and they get cleaned up by the volunteer community. The only reason I'm now being accused of 'bullying' is that I inferred that some articles on Wikipedia need to be examined for reasons to be deleted rather than kept, but basically that's what COIN and AfD do anyway. It's a risk paid editors take - Wikipedia was not founded to become a milk cow. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

You should link him to my user page. And he thought you were mean. He seems to fail both prongs of my essay. John from Idegon (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Akhadir Recordings Amsterdam and all the rest of it

H, Kudpung! At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akhadir Recordings Amsterdam, which you closed as delete, there were a couple of "salt" requests, one of them from me. Could I ask you to reconsider whether that might now be a good idea? The editor is here only to promote Ismaël Akhadir and his various music endeavours, and has now re-created AIX1 (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AIX1), then moved it to draft when I tagged it as G4, then removed the G4 tag from that too. May I suggest a generous dose of salt for both titles, and for Yagnare too, in both main and draft space? Would that work? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I've  Done one. TonyBallioni has done the other. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

new editor created G11

Hey, I thought only autocofirmed could create new spa articles. Special:Contributions/GoMedii--Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:44, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Dlohcierekim, that was the 6-month WP:ACTRIAL which has now ended and been switched off pending further discussion before final roll out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:04, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

We need it switched back on forever. Legacypac (talk) 19:34, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Oh, yes. Very much.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

I know I'm the only one that thinks this, but article creation should be reserved for extended confirmed and/or a right that can be conferred if one proves their ability. Article creation is not so simple as it once was.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

That would be too restrictive and would stunt the growth of the encyclopedia - although its corpus is well beyond the adolescent stage by now. Article creation is as simple as it ever was, the problem now is finding genuine encyclopedic articles that haven't been written yet. Most of what we get now are BLPs which unfortunately just pass GNG, vanity pages, and paid company spam masquerading as article. It's this latter that we npw need to combat most and ACTRIAL gre4atly helped us to single such creations out. Yes, Dlohcierekim, and Legacypac, ACTRIAL needs to be made permanent. It was a resounding success but we promised the community we would talk about it for a month before making it permanent. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:21, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Hopefully it is put back in place. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

There is a cultural idea that the Wiki Way includes making it easy to add anything and easy to revert. I found a proposal from 2007 where a WMF person wanted to open up IP article creation again! It did not pass but there were a lot of supporters for that. Legacypac (talk) 03:11, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm not surprised. Even today there is still a lingering WMF opinion that quantity is better than quality. However, with now over 5.5 million articles,it's time for them to realise that actually very few new articles are really necessary, as anyone who does NPP would readily admit. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:09, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

So glad to hear someone to say what I have felt for so long. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:59, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

ACTRIAL - next steps for the Future of AfC & NPP

Hello Kudpung, thank you for your efforts reviewing New Page and AfC submissions and your support for the ACTRIAL initiative.

The conclusion to the ACTRIAL report commissioned by the Wikimedia Foundation strongly reiterates our long-time on going requirements for the NPP and AfC processes to be improved. Within minutes of the trial being switched off, the feed was swamped with inappropriate creations and users are being blocked already.
This is now the moment to continue to collaborate with the WMF and their developers to bring the entire Curation system up to date by making a firm commitment to addressing the list of requirements to the excellent suite of tools the WMF developed for Curation. Some of these are already listed at Phabricator but may need a boost.
The conclusions also make some recommendations for AfC.
A place to discuss these issues initially is here where you are already a task force member.

---

Wikipedia:The future of NPP and AfC. To opt-out of future mailings, go here. From MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:02, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Since you created the NPP user right...

Hey! Kudpung, I think you would be the best point of contact since you created NPP user right and wrote its governing policy. I have an open/pending request for New Page Reviewer right. If you have time, would you please take a look? Something new to do on Wikipedia will keep me motivated to spend my time on Wikipedia. And please WP:AGF in me requesting this user right. I can really do my bit in improving this encyclopedia. Thanks! Dial911 (talk) 14:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Greenacres Middle School

Thank you for moving it the draftspace, and I agree that most of the time middle schools would be intelligible for their own articles. The reason I felt like it should have it's own article is because before it was a middle school, it functioned as one of the only (possibly the only) high school in the Spokane Valley. Howpper (talk) 00:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Howpper, I think you probably meant ineligible rather than intelligible. I understand your point but of course the voters at an eventual AfC would need some convincing unless you an find some very solid independent WP:RS. The main thing is that incomplete articles should not be created directly in mainspace. If they are, it overloads our patrolling capacity and will invite deletion templates and/or redirects. For more advice on schools see WP:WPSCH/AG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

BTW, that was just a typo. Howpper (talk) 00:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

WP:ACREQ

This may be a good place to centralize discussion of making ACTRIAL permanent. Legacypac (talk) 03:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, Tony and I have the RfC ready to go and in a correct dedicated location. I think he and I stand a very good chance of getting it accepted. We're more worried now about people throwing a wrench in the works about their wrong claims of WMUK and the editathon facilitators not being aware of ACTRIAL. Thanks for all your support, please consider the new issues to be addressed at Wikipedia talk:The future of NPP and AfC, you help there will also be important.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:11, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

I started the page as a shortcut to develop rational and for when I want to say "This is why we need WP:ACREQ" on a AFD or elsewhere. I'm following along and helping where I can. Let me know anything soecific I can do. Spent time on NPP today filtering for non-AC creators. What a lot of crap! I got at least 3 accounts blocked in a few minutes. The sooner the better to get ACREQ turned on. Legacypac (talk) 03:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, I think it would be a very good idea if you could consolidate the most important of the WMF's hypotheses on your page into a more easily readable form for those who are not used to interpreting stats. We'll link it in the RfC preamble. Tony and I are going to launch the RfC very soon now. It's ready to go. I have also been doing some NPP the last two days and I'm amazed, though not surprised, at the amount of crap. I've blocked a couple myslef already, and unilaterally deleted some rubbish without waiting for CSD. It's now time to be more aggressive with unmitigated trash articles - and PE.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Great idea but I'm not sure how good I am at translating their report to English. I've just added a section on new editor traninng though that I hope meets those objections squarely. Legacypac (talk) 05:43, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac, BTW, if you wan't anything you tag for CSD deleted quickly, let me know. It will help me to maintain an overview of what's going on in the feed - I don't actually work there regularly any more except for occasional short bursts. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

I have not worked NPP since actrial - focussed on draft management mostly - but decoded to get a feel for it again. My User:Legacypac/CSD_log is a good read. I just tagged a 100% fake village BURANKHERY and Guilherme Souza by new user User:Guisouzamarketing and this gem Michael Markowski (Visionary Analyst) where the title tells you everything you need to know about the intent (the guy is probably a good stock picker though) all by non-ac users. Legacypac (talk) 06:12, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Legacypac,good, we want you to keep concentrating on those drafts as well. I've deleted the articles you mentioned and one of the creators has been blocked by another admin. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:22, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Berber language articles

Hi Kudpung, I wanted to raise two new articles for your attention. The articles Ussan-nni and Ccfawat n weɣyul have just been created on English Wikipedia, but are (I think) in the Berber Kabyle language. I have a strong suspicion that they are extracts from books and therefore likely copyright violations. However it seems the copyvio tool does not detect anything (I suspect because it's a fringe language). Google book searches show me the books when I try with some random paragraphs from the books. Any thoughts? I think they are strong candidates for deletion but they don't really (strictly speaking) fall into CSD categories beyond the translation process.... Cheers, _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:31, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Jake Brockman, just leave them tagged as 'non English' and they'll be deleted when the tags expire.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:39, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Already done. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Restoration of Anal Cunt discography

I came upon this 'cause it created a whole bunch of broken redirects, but I've restored it as it looks like you were following up on inappropriate editing by Taranrap, who vandalized it to match the page you deleted. Before that, though, it was fine and beat A7/A9. Let me know if I'm in error! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I deleted what I saw. I didn't realise it was vandalism. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Paid editor with autopatrolled user right

I stumbled upon Isadora Newman in the course of some NPP work and was surprised to find that it had been autopatrolled by an editor with only 151 edits, Turns out he was granted autopatrolled even after he disclosed on his user page that he is a paid editor, although he does not disclose who his clients are. I don't think paid editors should bypass NPP and I would like to know what your thoughts are. Mduvekot (talk) 23:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Mduvekot. We have a precedent for action here. See User:KDS4444, but I'll get a second opinion before I do anything. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:02, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I would imagine an RfC on whether autopatrolled is compatible with paid editing might be... a productive use of time. GMG^talk 00:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that would be necessary. Since the huge KDS444 debacle, which was commented and actioned by several admins inlcuding Doc James (Board member), Sphilbrick (ORTS admin), Jayron32, DGG, and also commented by respected experienced editors such as Voceditenore on the persistent attempts to get paid edits into mainspace. Although the ban hinged mainly on the misuse of OTRS, allother user rights had been withdrawn. IMO the precedent is very clearly set. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

And we could use that precedent in this one case, or use it to justify an RfC to solidly guidance for those making the decision once this case has been well forgotten. GMG^talk 00:55, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the case being discssed here enters fully into PE, but we'll be finding out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:58, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

(tps) Evidently userrights are easy to get unless you are a highly active good faith volunteer editor. Legacypac (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

FYI, per User_talk:DanDavidCook#Courses_Modules_are_being_deprecated and my follow up there - flags associated with the eduprogram have been removed as part of its retirement, hopefully this addresses some of the concerns here. The editor may need some additional coaching on paid editing disclosure. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:18, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, xaosflux, that seems to have resolved it, for the time being at least. DGG has commented at the user talk page.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:24, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Please see the bottom of my talk page

User talk:Ayuta Tonomura#AfC closure. As you are admin the article should be deleted after closing an AfD result was delete.Ayuta Tonomura (talk) 02:29, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:31, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Tagging

Hi Kudpung. If Culture: Base and Superstructure of Trailer Park Boys is not nonsense, I'm not sure what is. Per Wikipedia:Patent nonsense, nonsense is "Content that, while apparently intended to mean something, is so confusing that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it." That is clearly a descriptor of this page. Per WP:ABOUTNPP, "[T]here is no requirement for simply patrolling new pages, it is helpful but not required that you have some understanding of what is a good enough article to stay and what is not, though no certification is required, and it is all up to you." Please consider WP:BITE in your future interactions with other editors who are clearly trying to make a genuine contribution to Wikipedia. Audiovideodiscoo (talk) 02:45, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Audiovideodiscoo, when you've got more than 46 mainspace edits, I'll listen. I'll even help, but don't lecture experienced editors - they might really bite. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:33, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

JamesBWatson deleted the page in question as G11 --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 13:28, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)::FWIW, Audiovideodiscoo, 19:54, March 19, 2018 JamesBWatson deleted page Culture: Base and Superstructure of Trailer Park Boys (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. The article exists only to publicise or promote the opinions of its author. (TW)). Guess he was able to read it and use the right criterion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Re Rudra Kaushish...

... I fear Indian/Tamil/Bangladesh actor articles are my Achilles' heel; there's lots of them, generally bad, and I often can't verify existence of sources because my searches just don't turn up stuff in non-Latin script. So I have a tendency to tag and hope that sources shall accrue. I suppose more aggressive prod/AfD-ing is indicated? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:23, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

@Elmidae: Hi there! If sources do exist that are reliable (and secondary), then PRODing and AfD are probably not the way to go. (That is more so the case with AfD, prods can be removed by anyone who objects - hopefully with a viable reason.) However, as you said, the sources show up in a language you do not know. Maybe use google translate (or your translator of choice) to get an idea if the sources found even mention the subject, identify the language, and ask for assistance at the relevant WikiProject? (talk page stalker) --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 13:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

The issue is more my search bubble - sources that contain the subject's name in non-Latin script won't even feature in my search results, but would be perfectly fine for an article. Thus the question is how quickly to pull the trigger on assuming that such sources do not, in fact, exist (as apparently happened with the article mentioned; now at AfD). --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Quality Control Music

Hey, how is Quality Control Music COI? I have nothing to do with the label, I just made them a Wikipedia article. Bandittx (talk) 01:05, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Bandittx, we may be wrong, it's just a precautionary mesage. That said, in our experience, WP:SPA generally do have a COI, as you will learn if you become a regular contributor. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:32, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

How on earth...

Hi Kudpung. How on earth was this account able to create this blatantly promotional article on an utterly non-notable entity the same day she registered and with only one previous edit? I thought WP:autoconfirmed was designed to prevent this. I haven't forgotten the proof reading for this. Will try to get to it later today or tomorrow. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Voceditenore: That was just a test. Its pro's and cons or permanence are under discussion at Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Request for comment on permanent implementation.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Dlohcierekim. Interestingly, the account above (obviously a paid "editor" to boot) nipped in less than 24 hours after the trial ended. I wonder how much similar crap stuff has now got in. Anyhow I shall now nip over to the RFC to express my wholehearted support. Voceditenore (talk) 14:22, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Voceditenore, it a classic example of what we get when we don't have ACTRIAL which prevents new users from creating new pages in mainspace. It's a very good example of why we need ACTRIAL. The only resistance to permanently implement it is coming from the WiR crowd who are claiming it disrupts their editathons. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I believe WiR have had several in-person edit-a-thons since this was introduced. A quick perusal of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red and its archives doesn't seem to reveal any alarm or problems stemming from ACTRIAL. Nor do they appear to have given much serious thought to helpful work-arounds like Wikipedia:Event coordinator proposal. If the 12 current opposers are all members of WiR, they appear to be rather idiosyncratic ones. Their arguments are all philosophical, so to speak. None of them have pointed out any major problems that were actually caused to the various edit-a-thons. Or perhaps I missed something? Voceditenore (talk) 16:52, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

<hysterical blurting /> I cannot see how anyone who has made a serious effort at NPP could not scream in horror at the thought of not implementing this.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm tempted to post their redlinked CSD logs without further comment. Such a tone deaf group I've never seen before. Legacypac (talk) 17:07, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: Wikimedian in Residence, not Women in Red. And it isn't just WIRs but any persons who work real world events trying to contribute to English Wikipedia. --Izno (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I see, Izno. Even so, I have yet to see the opposers present evidence of serious disruption to their projects by ACTRIAL. Frankly, Women in Red, tend to do a good job because they carefully select requested articles and provide back-up data to help in the writing. However, I've seen a few of these freelance real world events that have produced pretty dire results. Not to mention editors like the one I cited above who was plugging her company's not-even-in use-yet cryptocurrency. UGH! Voceditenore (talk) 18:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Just mopped and dusted CAT:CSD of WP:CSD#G11's. Net positive to not have these adverts in the main space.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:26, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of edit-a-thon-- Apparently they train COI (PAID?) editors with promotional user names-- Pweilstudio. I can see how requiring auto confirmed to create articles might crimp their style. 😂--Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:55, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Let's say you are Peggy Weil, and you want to contribute to Wikipedia, so you come to an edit-a-thon to learn how to edit, and while there you decide to try and fix some minor factual errors in an article about you, and you support that with citations. Then your reward is you get blocked because using your own name is a violation of a policy you've never heard of and you're accused of undisclosed paid editing because you have a COI. No wonder we're having difficulties with editor retention. Mduvekot (talk) 23:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

IP block

Hi Kudpung, I went ahead and unblocked User talk:2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63. I think you probably misclicked here: he was reverting another IP who needed to be blocked, and it was difficult to see in the diffs who was whom. This IP is a longterm user who fights spam and vandals, but prefers to use an IP address. NeilN, Cullen, Drmies, and myself are all familiar with them, so I didn't think you would mind an unblock. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

Hi Kudpung, user:77.186.155.34 is trying to add unsourced content at DXC Technology. I have used by 3RR's up already. Can you please take a look. scope_creep (talk) 15:37, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

This is a lie. It is all sourced and Scope creep never gave an explanation why a CEO of company with a revenue of 25 billion dollars is not notable.--77.186.155.34 (talk) 15:41, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Scope creep see User talk:77.186.155.34. I have also protected the article to prevent further disruption and/or edit warring. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Subject ‘Darshan Raval’ which is protected by you sir , Meets the criteria to get verified on Wikipedia

Hello Kudpung , it is great to see the milestone you have travelled in editing Wikipedia , its quiet impressive and inspiring , I was recently listening to this artist Darshan Raval he is quiet awesome and is having multiple mainstream articles on his name in mainstream media portals , since he’s Quiet famous I believe people must have attempted a couple of time to make his article and they didn’t succeeded in providing enough citations for the same , since I am new here and have keen interest in becoming a good wiki editor I have collected some strong links which if seen will show his eligibility to get verified on Wikipedia so kindly checkout the article and unlock it if it meets the notability criteria thank you ❤️

• Darshan Raval (Playback Singer), (Born 18 October 1994) is an Indian Playback Singer , Songwriter , Performer , and Composer from Ahmedabad in India . He Gained Massive Fame from Indian reality show named India’s Rawstar aired on Star Plus which was judged by Honey Singh and later by Himesh Reshammiya

Darshan got his Bollywood break from Himesh Reshammiya HeyLetgoletgo (talk) 02:26, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

HeyLetgoletgo, as far as I can see, no article under that name had been created or deleted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง , sorry its as Darshan Raval HeyLetgoletgo (talk) 03:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

HeyLetgoletgo, The previous article was deleted as unambigous advertising so I will not restore it anywhere on Wikipedia. Please make a completely new article and make it in the Draft namspace. If it will help, I can email you a copy of the original, but on no account must it be used in the new article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)Ah...K, he posted the entire content at your t/p, expecting your stamp of approval and minutes later, directly created the article at Darshan Raval (Playback Singer), thus bypassing the title-salting.He is (probably) just requesting you to move it to the protected title.~ Winged Blades^Godric 12:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I think we can just leave it as it is. We dont want the old article in the history and this one is completely different. The Times of India sources make it notable. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:38, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Gavin Williamson

Hello, I believe you are a moderator, if you are not, I apologize.

Can I please request that you keep a strong and close look at the following article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Williamson as there is a left wing bias on this page violating the term & conditions of this website, it also includes newspaper rumors, private parliamentary votes and large information of personal matters, all of which should not be on Wikipedia, I believe this to be being carried out by Momentum activists and ideally a restriction in editing the article would be the best solution. Kind regards 146.198.36.221 (talk) 23:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@146.198.36.221: At first blush, you have removed sour:ced content and a politician's voting record is very much acceptable content for an encyclopedia. I have protected the page and discussion on the talk page may now take place.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:53, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Please Help

I'm getting caught up in unnecessary drama with | this IP just because I reverted an edit he did to a page where he took alot of content out. He know has thrown me into this, which I feel like is just a waste of time and I don't want to fight a reverting POV pusher. Can you please help me out here? I know your an admin and you seem like you could help me here. 💵Money💵emoji💵^Talk 23:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

(I litterly just realized I'm talking about the guy above. how ironic) 💵Money💵emoji💵^Talk 23:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I have protected the page. I disagree with the content removal. Someone neutral could look at it.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks; I honestly did not think that reverting that one edit would start all of this.💵Money💵emoji💵^Talk 23:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC) I would also like to note that I don't even live in Britian and don't care about the politics there; I just reverted an edit that looked like POV pushing removal to me. 💵Money💵emoji💵^Talk 00:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Somehting strange

Hello Kudpung, I was wondering if you might know the answer to something. In editing a Wikipedia bracket for a golf tournament, I noticed that some of the 2nd round brackets did not correspond to the first round, meaning that they were mysteriously out of order. Do you know why this might be the case? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

No. Sorry, Johnsmith2116, I don't know anything about golf. Snooker is my game. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. It's not so much about golf, it's simply about the brackets. How or why the order would end up looking in a different order in the editing page than it looks on the main page, is odd. I'm hoping to find someone who can tell me why this might happen. Johnsmith2116 (talk) 16:44, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Johnsmith2116, it sounds very much as if with 'brackets' you may be talking about something to do with the format of a table, but without any links to the problem, I really can't help. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:24, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Bump J

The article did state the purpose of page he is a American rapper who career was derailed after bank robbery charges which set his career back I mean if you don’t understand don’t be so quick to delete this is more reason why this site is not credible because of editors like you writing for friends another Hollywood problem smh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perfection10125 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but Wikipedia is not for writing about your friends, especially when they don't meet our criteria for notability. If you want to promote your fried, consider using social media. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:51, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)I've heard discontented (and blocked) POV/fringe-pushers vent out at OTRS over the acute unreliability of our site but I have never before seen such a rationale, in defence of these type of articles.WP is charming and inherently surprising.....~ Winged Blades^Godric 13:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Grindcomber

You gave editor Grindcomber a final warning in February so you might want to look at Igor Ciel. This editor submits new articles to Articles for Creation and then bypasses the system by approving the articles him/herself. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:19, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth, I don't think there's much we can do about it. He's autoconfirmed and doesn't need to go through AfC. Technically it's disruptive, but the main thing is for patrollers to thoroughly check that his articles meet our criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Innocent

I never did anything wrong. I'm innocent and I want to make a correct and making to improved articles. Please dismissed it.

Whoever you are, please see the notice on the top of this page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:50, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Page Deletion

If a page is deleted, is it appropriate only to contact the admin that deleted the page in attempts to have restored??? Is is taboo to reach out to another admin with assistance in the event the deleting admin isn't responsive? I thought that open communication and reaching out to Admins was encouraged. Please advise.

My posts were taken down for G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion... it says under that clause specifically that "If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion." This was not made opportune to me. The pages were simply deleted without a chance for me to edit. This seems wrong to me. I am doing what is asked of me. I am trying to follow directions.

Whitevwins (talk) 19:49, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I have already answered on you talk page explaining how to get an article undeleted. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 at Women in Red

		Welcome to Women in Red's April 2018 worldwide online editathons. Focus on: April+Further with Art+Feminism Archaeology Military history (contest) Geofocus: Indian subcontinent Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list or Women in Red/international list. To unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list. Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred --Rosiestep (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

If you are online...

Could you copy your Signpost submissions to a user subpage, and I'll take it from there? ☆ Bri (talk) 17:17, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

OK, Bri. But I was going to delete the ACTRIAL one and make a report on the trial when the RfC is over in just another two weeks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:30, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm starting to pull sections together. No time to change it now... Please create two subpages if you can, one for the ACTRIAL op-ed; one for the "Death knell" op-ed. I'll include both. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Bri both articles are at User:Kudpung/Signpost. I belive you just need to copy and paste them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:44, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Bri Good luck. It's 1:00AM here and I have to go turn over and get some sleep. Busy day in the office tomorrow. Icf you need anything I'll be back on line in about 5 - 6 hours during breakfast.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

• Op-ed: Death knell for The Signpost?

• News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.

• Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.

• In the media: The media on Wikipedia's workings: the good and not-so-good

• Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers

• Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs

• Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.

• Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.

• Humour: WikiWorld Reruns

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Your op-ed

I think it would be helpful if you added an update to your op-ed, at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-03-29/Op-ed, since the (overdue) Signpost issue has in fact appeared. Otherwise, it seems odd that an op-ed in the Signpost is complaining about there being no Signpost issue. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

John Broughton It was published because I got it published. In the total absence of editorial staff, the engineers who pushed the publishing buttons did not review or copy edit the submissions. At least it finally appeared. I did my bit. 20:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I take responsibility ... in my haste I slammed Kudpung's contributions in without really reading them thoroughly, so we could have a March issue. I'm taking a break after tonight for the weekend. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:33, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

No need to apologise, Bri, your help in pulling the bells and whistles was invaluable. I quickly copy edited what was needed. Without you it couldn't have been done. In fact I should apologise for putting you under so much pressure! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)