User talk:Sjö

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I prefer to keep conversations together and usually respond on my talk page, so watch the page for my reply.

To leave a message on this page, please click here.

New Year's greeting[edit]

Savvyjack23 (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Savvyjack23 (talk) 08:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Hempearth Group Ltd.[edit]

Hi there, would these be reputable enough

The above the article was also in print

This was in USA TODAY

This article was in the major Costa Rica newspaper TICO TIMES

We have also been given permission to launch our first aircraft from The Wright Brother's Memorial site, and The Discovery Channel will also film construction and maiden voyage.

We have a contract in place and will be constructing sometime in 2016. We have countless back links and if you google hempearth or myself Derek Kesek, I am sure you would find we are quite notable.

How can we proceed to put ourself on your amazing platform?

Thank you as well for your time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

They might be, but I'm not sure. I googled Hempearth and there seems to be significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Just be sure to include them in the article.
Also, since you wrote about "our brand" I guess that you're connected to the company. That's problematic since you have a conflict of interest and such editing is strongly discouraged. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations and Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations. If you want to go ahead and create an article anyway, make sure that you think of the following:
  • Declare your conflict of interest on your user talk page. If you're being paid to edit Wikipedia, say so. Otherwise, a simple mention that you're connected to the Hempearth will do.
  • Keep the text factual and support any important fact with sources. Avoid any words that might be understood as marketing; the text should rather be dull and bland than promotional. The company's mission statement will e.g. seem like marketing to an outside reader. (Think as an accountant, not as a director of marketing. )
  • Look at articles for other small companies and model the article on them.
  • Your article might be questioned or deleted. Stay calm and polite, and argue for the article on its talk page, using arguments based on Wikipedia policies about notability. This is not only an encyclopedia, it's also a community, and reputation is important here.
Leave me a message here when you created the article and I'll look at it. Sjö (talk) 08:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion[edit]

Hi, there brother..!! thanks for your rapid edit appreciated, can you please contest speedy deletion for Safirullah Siddiqui Lehri (actor) and keep Safirullah Siddiqui Lehri, thanks. -- Faizan Munawar Varya chat contributions 09:27, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

No. That's not how it's done. You should never copy and paste to create a new article. Articles can be moved to another article title by established users, and you can start a discussion at Talk:Lehri (actor) to see if you can get consensus for a page move. It looks to me as if the page is at the right place, considering WP:COMMONNAME but if his full name is better known it might be better to move it. Sjö (talk) 09:32, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Yea, that was sliped up from my mind, I came back after 2 years almost so forgot about that tool, so nominated my page for speedy deletion bro, thanks.

Self Nomination for Speedy Deletion[edit]

Hey, bro, nominated for speedy deletion Safirullah Siddiqui Lehri (actor)

Edit to Rob Base and D J EZ Rock[edit]

Hi, you archived my edit as there was not a supporting citation. Please can you tell me how I can access the archive and provide what you need? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

At the top of each article and talk page there's a "View history" link. Klick it and you will se the changes, and if you click "prev" next to a change you will se that change. There should be an "undo" link to revert the change, or you could copy the removed text an paste it in an edit window. Sjö (talk) 08:24, 16 January 2016 (UTC)


I want to come clean with you and confess that the latest edit on the "Young Earth Creationism" article was fueled by my anger toward religion, it frankly clouded my judgement and I sincerely apologize.

Best of wishes Leif the Great Alien a.k.a Baloney King — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leif.the.great.alien.aka.baloney.king (talkcontribs) 11:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

No problems. Go, and sin no more. ;) Sjö (talk) 15:06, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit war? I've posted your war in many places where I keep a true local legend alive![edit]


Your volunteer efforts must have been watching and waiting for a "red flag" for more action under OHS. What you don't know is the few lines you removed were posted under OHS for 2 years. My living cousin was a witness to the strange prediction to the exact month, the exact day, and the exact time of 0755 when the call to classes bells were heard two years prior to the first bomb hitting Pearl Harbor at 0755 on December 7, 1941!

So many red flags were flying long before that day. And you just removed one of them from the history of OHS at wikipedia! I will try using proper channels to get this legend posted in brief again. So I hope you will be notified to leave this alone. Coretheapple, another wikipedia volunteer, once admitted she or he might have made a mistake. You've also made a mistake in your deletion so quickly this day.

Good luck to Sweden, Germany, Austria, Hungary, France, and England! Your countries are very slowly being over run by M.E. immigrants so ready and willing to harm all eventually. You cannot edit your new neighbors away, sadly you cannot.

Cody Joe White - living 4 city blocks East of the old OHS location. After trying once again, then seeing tonight's fast arriving bad luck to post Robert's message to his Geography teacher on the top floor. Again my cousin and my late coach were his classmates and witnesses telling me this true report. I have never edited away anything on the OHS page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Malaria Kidd (talkcontribs)

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say, but it looks as if you edit to preserve the memory of one Robert W Roll. Wikipedia isn't the place for that. Sjö (talk) 11:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Harry Azadian[edit]

Information icon Hello Sjö. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3), or significance (CSD A7) moments after they are created, as you did at Harry Azadian. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. A new user is entitled to more than one minute to complete work on their first article. Even a quick Gsearch turns up evidence of news coverage sufficient to defeat A7. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by admins since 2006. (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Generally, I try to make at least a Google search to determine claim of significance (unless in the obvious cases like "X is my friend in high school and plays basketball"). If I recall correctly the article I tagged was short, nonsensical and bordering on an attack. I think the deletion history shows that I made a correct call, this time. I will keep your advice in mind.Sjö (talk) 05:36, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Please remove[edit]

Please remove the vandalism report I promise not to do it again ok just please remove it. thanks.-- (talk) 14:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't trust you, so I won't. Just don't vandalize again and you won't be blocked once your block is over. Sjö (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm asking you nicely ok just please remove it I regret doing this just please do me a favor-- (talk) 14:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Just please do me a favor and remove the report ok I know it's difficult to trust people but you can trust me and believe me just please -- (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


They did kill people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobdont eat gmo (talkcontribs) 10:19, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Don't vandalize. If you feel that something is missing in an article, add it with sources and in good English.Sjö (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Expanding bullets[edit]

Hello. Customary international law has nothing whatsoever to do with what the original text of the treaty says, it's just a reinterpretation/practical application of it. The original treaty expressly states that it only applies to international warfare between signatories of the treaty, which should be mentioned in the article, along with what the article also says about later customary law/reinterpretation of it. So what you're doing is removing properly sourced content, with with no valid reason for it. Thomas.W talk 12:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I can read what the treaty says, and similar texts can be found in other treaties. That doesn't mean that parties that didn't sign the treaties are never bound by the rules in such treaties. Sometimes they are bound by those rules, which is why I referred to customary international law and jus cogens in my edit comment. As you can see in the section there is disagreement about the issue so per WP:NPOV Wikipedia should describe the standpoints and stay neutral. Saying in Wikipedia's voice that the declaration only applies to the signatories isn't NPOV. Sjö (talk) 13:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Reporting what the original treaty says and what later reinterpretations are, is a s neutral as it can possibly be, while redacting the original text and in effect only reporting the later reinterpretation is POV. Thomas.W talk 13:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Let's keep this discussion in one place, at Talk:Expanding bullet where it belongs. Sjö (talk) 05:45, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Anjadip Island[edit]

Wasn't sure what was going on and it looked like it was a redirect so I reverted that, sorry about that! Wgolf (talk) 19:02, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Saw that you changed the request just as I was saving a clarification at WP:RPP. Sjö (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
I see "Anjediva Island" is what we're calling it in the lead, so should it be moved to Anjediva Island? I can do this for you MusikAnimal talk 19:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't care one way or the other, except that any move shouldn't be copypaste and that WP:COMMONNAME is followed. Sjö (talk) 19:58, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieval of deleted article[edit]

Hello, I would like to retrieve the article I wrote titled "Megan Shultz", Thanks Colehs (talk) 23:16, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

@Colehs: Unfortunately i can't help you, since I don't have acces to deleted articles. You will have to ask the deleting administrator, Xezbeth (talk · contribs). Sjö (talk) 23:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
You'll have to ask another admin. I do not restore articles that have no hope of surviving in mainspace, and this one fits that description. —Xezbeth (talk) 05:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice about moving pages[edit]

Hi Sjö - thanks for the advice on moving / merging the pages and italki. I have another Wikipedia account that I use that is older and has more edits. I am trying to follow the process for the move. (It's not possible to do the dropdown menu Move, because the main page italki already exists. I have since made the request by copying the rationale for the page move at the bottom of the talk page. I hope that is enough. In case it isn't, I was wondering if I could get your help on this, because I'm still not entirely sure how the process works. Many thanks. Kshanghai (talk) 11:09, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I couldn't move it either, probably because Italki has a history that shows that it has been something other than a simple redirect. I see that you made a request at WP:RM#C which is the right way to go about it when you can't move a page without admin assistance. The request is well explained and fairly uncomplicated, so I think that somebody will move the page soon enough. Sjö (talk) 11:28, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Falsehood of notion of sexual jihad. Marriage is not "sexual jihad"[edit]

In the conflict of ideologies and civilisations, one side will try to paint the other side as evil, corrupt, immoral etc when in reality nothing could be further from the truth. Hence in the conflict between the West and the Islamic world, the West will try and label mujahideen and their supporters as immoral and evil. These are the classic principles of war propaganda. The point is - there is no such thing as sexual jihad - by stating this term you are dishonoring chaste Muslim women who go to the war zones where Shariah (God's law) prevails and marry the fighters in a matrimonial relationship. You are insulting a nation which comprises 20% of the earth. If it is difficult for you to understand why a woman would want to live in the most dangerous areas of the world, then understand she wants a proper warrior, a soldier (mujahid) for a husband rather than an impotent coward man. You are accusing them of being fornicators like those people of the West. Marrying fighters is not jihad nor sexual jihad - it is called marriage - a common practice that has existed amongst human beings for millenia. They are following the Qur'an and Sunnah when it comes to marriage, not having illicit sexual relationships like those of the West. Would you call a Christian woman that marries a Christian member of USMC performing a sexual crusade? No you wouldn't because you know she believes in something (false as it may be) and she wants to marry someone who shares the same belief as her. The same is the situation with women who leave the West for islamic war zones. Insulting Muslims, Muslim women and Islam will get you no where in life - I just wanted to state how disgusted I was at this pathetic attempt to discredit a religion of 1.6billion. Wikipedia is meant to be a website of factual articles not fabricated biased wartime propaganda BS!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:26, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia describes what has been reported in reliable sources. Article content is determined by discussion on the article talk page, in this case Talk:Sexual jihad . Please make you argument there, You might want to read WP:EQ which describes some of the process of working towards consensus, and also WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:PERSONAL as your edit comment and the text above suggests that you might express yourself in a way that will not help you persuade other editors of the validity of your arguments and sources. Sjö (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg Happy 6th, if you celebrate it - otherwise, happy day-off-work-with-nice-weather-at-a-very-lovely-time-of-year!

Also, Twinkle is really rather silly at times. You'd think it would recognise that another user's user talk page doesn't "belong" to the first other user who posted to it... bonadea contributions talk 12:33, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Edits in reference desk ( )[edit]

Hello. I like table formatting. And I think, plain text (which I see now ) is much harder for visual perception. With plain text, which is common in wiki, it's hard to see where comment ends and where next begins. Signing does not help, as signing has same format as comment itself. And indent is also very poor, as after few replies text becomes 50% of window and again becomes hard to read. I think, it is possible to make second column narrower to 33%:

Question Remark
In this article (cahce , pdf) is said that "Because of the large deficits, federal debt held by the public soared, nearly doubling during the period.". I have tested it here and yes, Debt Held by the Public was doubled. But Debt Held by the Public is Treasury debt -- what Treasury must pay back. But in article is said about federal debt -- what federal government must pay back.

In another article : "The increase in Medicare spending, which currently accounts for 14 percent of federal outlays, is a major factor in projected growth of the national debt.".

Federal government debt we can see here in table D.3.

Can anybody explain me, how does federal government or Treasury create their debts. E.g. for welfare (Emergency Assistance (EA), General Assistance (GA), Supplemental Security Income, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Medicaid) federal government takes money in Treasury. So federal government must pay these money back to Treasury. Correct? But why does then Debt Held by the Public increase? Debt Held by the Public should increase when public buys Treasury bonds.

Also there is Intragovernmental Holdings -- money that Treasury must pay back to federal government.

So how this system of debts actually works? And why there is no netting of debts. E.g. if Treasury owes 5 tn. to government and government owes 5 tn. to Treasury, it's equivalent to total zero debt.

prev. discussion 1

prev. discussion 2

If tables are forbidden, please give me link to rules, where it is written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Username160611000000 (talkcontribs) 06:30, 13 July 2016 (UTC) Username160611000000 (talk) 08:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

The table might look perfect to you, with your computer, OS, browser, monitor and settings and still be unreadable or hard to read for those with other devices. Using a format that's hard to read for those that you are trying to communicate with is not a good idea. I don't know if there are any rules against it, and frankly I don't think it's important enough to look up. I might have helped you look it up as a friendly gesture, just as I restored your post in a readable format at RD/H. But since you choose to report MarnetteD and me to admins when we didn't rush to respond to you that's out of the question. You're on your own, please don't contact me again. Sjö (talk) 05:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (sorry, it wasn't me) Kleuske (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Reverted edit[edit]

Why was this edit reverted? All I did was remove repeated words. (talk) 10:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Because attempted sexual assault is one thing, sexual assault is another. If one is removed the sentence is misleading. Sjö (talk) 10:43, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

FYI about who is AcidSnow[edit]

In the article Somalis it is clearly evident the brutal behavior of ISIS/Shabaab supporters inside our Wikipedia! Only a person with fanatism can make disappear fifty years of colonial history, like AcidSnow is doing.

Allow me to suggest you to read " " in order to understand who is user:AcidSnow. He is an "underground" supporter of ISIS/Al-Shabaab inside our en.wikipedia, and is linked to a banned user called Middayexpress.......If you want more info about him, please go to — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:50, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Time Signature.[edit]

I'm only an occasional user. I must say that your remark that 'BPM has nothing to do with time signatures' is remarkable to me. Not even a slow-witted music teacher would agree with that comment.

Matt Vatterott — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C492:8210:689F:59D0:7360:15F (talk) 11:47, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Sure, it's alright with me if you want to believe that that the time signature should change if you, say, change the tempo from 60 to 120 bpm, but don't confuse our readers by writing that in the article.Sjö (talk) 18:43, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Western film vandal[edit]

Hi, thank you for reverting Hangman's Knot etc. I don't understand these updates either! They've been going on since last year; further details at User:Certes/Western. Certes (talk) 10:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Kemi Omololu-Olunloyo[edit]

I was talking about social media logos displayed on someone's article. How do those get there? Some musicians and public figures have twitter, instagram, pinterest logos showing. Why is hers not posted and just Facebook?

The Kay Jeezy and KJ the Kid Reporter thing is a stub I want to build because the child is also a public figure with several inclusions in the media. However these articles are not in the name Kay Jeezy. They are under KJ the Kid Reporter when you google it. Can I still go ahead and create a stub? Baltoboy (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Links: Per WP:LINKSTOAVOID item #10, links to social media are generally discouraged. Such links in other articles are most likely there because no-one has seen and removed the or because in that particular article they serve a specific purpose.
Kay Jeezy: Like I implied before, you can create an article, but make sure that the person is notable per Wikipedia standards. If I remember correctly there has been articles about her son that were quickly deleted because he was not notable (at that time, at least). When you create an article, please make sure that you understand the relevant notability guidelines and that you include relevant sources that show that the person is notable. Sjö (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

White Sitcoms[edit]

But why is the sitcom norm on Wikipedia assumed to be white? That's not how the world works, just this site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:55, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Take that discussion to Talk:Sitcom. If you can argue well and provide reliable sources that "white sitcom" is a term that's common you might be able to change the name of the article. Sjö (talk) 09:59, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Laura Branigan föddes 3/7-1952. Allt annat är fel[edit]

Hej Sjö Laura Branigan föddes 3/7-1952 i Mount Kisco, Westchester County. Det var hennes lillebror Billy som föddes 1957, 28:e Februari för att vara exakt. Hur jag vet? Ja, säg det. Men jag kan säga så mycket att jag känner människor som växte upp med Laura Branigan i Armonk. Som gick i samma katolska skola från 1959 till 1966. Klassfotot från 1966 finns i min ägo.--Born53 swe (talk) 08:42, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Det finns många på nätet som hävdar det ena eller det andra. Utan källor är det omöjligt att säga vad som är sant, och därför kräver Wikipedia pålitliga källor på det som läggs in i artiklarna och kan ifrågasättas. Sjö (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Utan källor säger du, var någonstans hittar du källor på att Laura och Billy föddes samma år? Jag vill påstå att det är omöjligt, men Wikipedia har ju skrivit det och då är det väl sant. Jag har lite problem med Laura's 1957, överallt står det att Laura var nummer 4 i syskonskaran, men om nu Laura var född i Juli 1957, då blir ju hon nummer 5 i syskonskaran. Eftersom Billy också var född 1957 i Februari. Är du väldigt säker på att Laura föddes 1957? Ang källorna, det finns 2 källor i wikipedia som klart och tydligt säger att Laura Branigan föddes 1952. Om hon nu är född 1957, hur kunde hon då ta sin examen 1970, endast 9år? Givetvis så ger jag inga ledtrådar var du hittar dessa uppgifter. Men om du har läst allt som finns om Laura, så vet man direkt var man hittar det. Så det lustiga är att wiki skriver 1957, när man refererar till källor som säger Laura föddes 1952. Lite lustigt, va? Om nu Laura var född 1957, när är då Billy född? Fundera på det tills jag tittar in nästa gång.--Born53 swe (talk) 20:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Det här är fel plats att diskutera den frågan. Rätt plats är artikelns diskussionssida. Sjö (talk) 16:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Lessen, jag är inte välkommen där så jag avstår hellre. Så här såg min sida ut som inte fick vara kvar länge. Den var väldigt uppskattad av dom som kände Laura. Tyvärr så kommer den nog aldrig tillbaka. Laura Branigans perfect wiki. Destroyed April 16, 2016 by Devilmanozzy--Born53 swe (talk) 19:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Skall bara meddela att Laura's Social Security Number finns i min Laura samling. Hon var född 1952 i New York. Inte Mount Kisco! Men det är inget som wiki ska få ta del av. Men, men, sånt är livet--Born53 swe (talk) 23:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

User group: New Page Reviewr[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Sjö.

Based on the patrols you made of new pages during a qualifying period in 2016, 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.

  • 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Sjö. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Citation Barnstar The Citation Barnstar
For your efforts providing a reliable source for the murder of a female assassin in the article Operation Wrath of God
Dan Koehl (talk) 20:07, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter[edit]

Hello Sjö,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
Breaking the back of the backlog
We now have 283 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.
Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

The Challenge Series[edit]

The Challenge Series is a current drive on English Wikipedia to encourage article improvements and creations globally through a series of 50,000/10,000/1000 Challenges for different regions, countries and topics. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are invited to participate.