Approximately one hour ago, you helped me very much delete a momentary mistake of mine. Please have a great day!! from Seoul, Korea Kimsuzu ( talk)... 12:33, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi MrX,
Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Gulf Fritillaries Mating 0019.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on October 23, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-10-23. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 13:26, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
With regard to discretionary sanctions, and in the hope that Wikipedia moderators do not have immunity from reasonable editorial standards, you should reconsider removal of sources within which solid sources are cited. Furthermore, the Hillary_Clinton#Email_controversy section is glaringly lacking regarding her long history of e-mail misconduct. JLMadrigal @ 16:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
It is not vandalism. We have no need for a link for something like campaign material. It is easily referenced and found on the internet with a search. Please you have added campaign and fluff material back in that has no place in an encyclopedia. This is fact based. Also, no need to name her parents three times and tell us she was in this after school activity. The article read like a fluff piece and you blanketly reverted all edits is vandalism. If a link was broken then you fix it. Thank you for your help todayXX — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE98:1510:4CEF:D74C:D98C:4A0E ( talk) 15:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Using two colons (instead of one) for indentation is not excessive, and it clearly indicates who is responding to whom. [1] Your time and effort might be better spent trying to comprehend WP:BLP than enforcing trivialities and writing insulting edit summaries. Cheers! 😜 Anythingyouwant ( talk) 20:06, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
( talk page stalker)My approach FWIW: 1. WP:THREAD provides guidelines on indentation. 2. Good indentation practices enhance readability. 3. Good readability enhances communication. 4. Good communication enhances the encyclopedia. 4. Many, many editors fail to indent correctly. Many aren't even aware of how to do it correctly. Therefore bad indentation is widsespread. 5. We can't correct everything without seeming like a disruptive OCD pedant, as well as using time that would be better spent on other things. 6. If you see indentation that is so bad that it really needs correction, correct it with an edit summary like: Corrent indents per WP:THREAD and WP:TPO bullet 7. No need for confrontational editsums, and in fact they are counterproductive. The bad indenters may see your edit. If they see it, they may improve their indenting practices. Or they may not. ― Mandruss ☎ 21:41, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your tireless devotion to the Wikipedia project. Thank you. -- Somedifferentstuff ( talk) 23:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, MrX, thanks very much for alerting KINGOFTO to the discretionary sanctions relevant to Donald Trump. I wish more people posted those alerts, it would make admins' jobs easier. I've re-templated him, though, so that he's told about the American politics and BLP decisions — it may be farfetched, but I worry he may get away with disregarding the notice if he doesn't get the right links. (OTOH, I don't worry that he removes those templates, as he no doubt will with mine too. That's on him.) For future reference: if you replace "topic" in the template {{subst:alert|topic}} with the standard initialism for the subject area in question, it will link correctly. In this case, those are ap and blp — there's a list of them here (scroll down). Thanks again! Bishonen | talk 04:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC).
Hello MrX. 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.
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. — MusikAnimal talk 23:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
How dare you accuse me of valdalism, for an edit correcting hyphens to ndashes per MOS:NDASH. And are you even aware of the new MoS concerning yr abbrevs in dateranges (per WP:DATERANGE). To accuse of vandalism on a good-faith (and in this case also correct) edit is hyper uncivil/bad faith and considered pretty serious fault. You don't know these things?! IHTS ( talk) 18:17, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
How prejudiced, aggressive, wrong, and uncivil. (You are an experienced WP editor??) IHTS ( talk) 18:31, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Time to request semi-prot do you think? Only in death does duty end ( talk) 14:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
CNN is being sued for exactly the nonesense you are putting in the wikipedia article. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/306106-breitbart-news-planning-lawsuit-against-major-media-company
-- Bongey ( talk) 23:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I accept your point that talk pages are for improvement of the article, so it's fair enough that you closed that discussion. However, I am curious as to why you said "no, you're incorrect". Would you care to explain? It's pretty clear that the root "homo" means mankind, not homosexual. Thanks PointOfPresence ( talk) 15:56, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Why did you erase my whole page before even talking about it??? All the theatre schools in Toronto have Wikipedia pages. Why did you erase the one I was building??
George Brown Theatre School, Ryerson Theatre School, National Theatre School -- all have pages. I don't understand why you did this to a new member of the wiki community. I worked for hours on that page. Please put it back.
EVerhaer ( talk) 22:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 22:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Stop editing the West Valley High School page and taking useful and factual information off of it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.214.196 ( talk) 22:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MrX. 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)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi MrX/Archive. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 23:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
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.
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.
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) .
We're encouraged to be bold and add stuff if it's sourced. If someone reverts it then they ought to bring it up on the talk page. If they don't then I'll make a section to discuss any objections made.
Being reverted doesn't necessarily mean you are in the wrong, a lot of people revert anything they don't like regardless of it being sourced or not. Ranze ( talk) 18:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I started a post at ANI regarding your closure. Dan56 ( talk) 03:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
"Yes the genres should be added back in the infobox."does not give any reasoning at all. Similarly, the comment by troublednbored does not address the ambiguity of whether the source was speaking of genres or influences, or referring to some songs or the entire album. Ojorojo made compelling arguments, as did most everyone else. The lack of consensus is best exemplified by your own remark:
"We just differ on how we understand what he's saying, or the purpose/implciations of the genre field in the infobox, and you seem to be downplaying each source".It should not be surprising that this discussion would end in a stalemate, especially since it concerned the very contentious subject of genres in infoboxes.
I've reverted your edit on the Breitbart article as there is no consensus yet. If you believe there is a consensus please reply to the Talk page, to avoid an edit war. Phatwa ( talk) 16:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't want to be bold and revert a move on en.wiki because I am mainly active on it.wiki and on Commons and not much into mechanisms on here. As for the discussion in the said page, I raised twice the issue in the last six years but nobody cared. -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 14:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, now the article scudetto is consistent with the other ones in the other linguistic chapters. What's the request for the deletion of User:Blackcat/Scudetto? -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 14:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "
Request for review of Wurdi Youang RFC closure".The discussion is about the topic
Wurdi Youang. Thank you.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
08:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) ( user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. If you have questions, please contact me.-- Gwillhickers ( talk) 16:56, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I swear I'm not stalking - I just happen to watch the OSC article as well and saw this edit. Wasn't sure if you knew, but www.hatrack.com is OSC's website. So he is a reliable source for his opinion. It's a primary source, so no interpretation can be made, but it is an RS. It falls under WP:SELFSOURCE Morphh (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Please make sure, while deleting the contents, that the material is completely without a source. It seems some of the deletions of the content belonging to the page
Chathamangalam (Kannur) was done without proper research. A
Citation needed tag would have saved such a fast deletion of the content, meanwhile someone would have contributed with ample source material in English. Please do rethink on your action.
Also, please do go into Thabore, a place adjacent to Chathamangalam (Kannur) and kindly explain why so much of unsourced data in that page without any citation. I can also show many such pages where there is no proper citation and yet no deletions happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evergreen Chathamangalam ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
@MrX, Thanks for your quick reply. I did indeed go through your personal profile before making the above comments. Gland to learn that you are very much keen on protecting Wikipedia against vandalism. But then again, most of the content written were news items in leading vernacular dailies including Malayala Manorama My concern here is why pages like Thabore, just 4 kilometers away from and as tiny as the place in discussion is having 8000+ digits narration, all of which has come without any citation. Please go to the references of the same page and see any oth those links are in any way related to the particular village. I have got a lot of newspaper reports in Malayalam regarding all the content in the page, as a soft copy. Can you pls. tell me if I can use them as a citation ?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.236.28 ( talk) 10:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.
ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE
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) 06:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .
AE does not require consensus among admins, or lengthy discussion
.
I'm not sure who told you that, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a reliable source. TimothyJosephWood 17:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello Mr.X, thank you for reading and tagging the article David Giorgio Mendes Nassi I wrote a while back. I've attempted to add new and informative citations to this article to hopefully satisfy the wikipedia requirements and would appreciate your feedback. I've encountered difficulties in citing alumni records and licensing details, as these are all fifty years old and not available online. Furthermore, I'm finding it hard to identify what facts actually require citation YonmaNm ( talk) 18:43, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
I have blocked all the IPs that have contributed to all these related articles and who are all editing from within 5 or 6 miles of the same UK geolocation. This is so obvious that besides the persistent removal of deletion templates, it is an attempt to evade 3R. The actual persistence in these edits can lead one to assume that it is spam or COI but it might not be easy to prove. I have not blocked the registered user in anticipation that they will in fact be caught in one of the IP blocks, so if they make an appeal for IP block exemption that will prove the obvious socking. We need to look out for the use of yet more IPs from that area. We can't do a range block there because they might well be public areas or hotspots, and not all are in the same IP ranges. I'll go back now and vote delete on all the AfD; if you have any thoughts , don't hesitate to drop me a line. I've also left this message at user talk:Robert McClenon. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 03:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for giving the admins a heads-up for me! -- Scjessey ( talk) 18:59, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Approximately one hour ago, you helped me very much delete a momentary mistake of mine. Please have a great day!! from Seoul, Korea Kimsuzu ( talk)... 12:33, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi MrX,
Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Gulf Fritillaries Mating 0019.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on October 23, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2016-10-23. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 13:26, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
With regard to discretionary sanctions, and in the hope that Wikipedia moderators do not have immunity from reasonable editorial standards, you should reconsider removal of sources within which solid sources are cited. Furthermore, the Hillary_Clinton#Email_controversy section is glaringly lacking regarding her long history of e-mail misconduct. JLMadrigal @ 16:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
It is not vandalism. We have no need for a link for something like campaign material. It is easily referenced and found on the internet with a search. Please you have added campaign and fluff material back in that has no place in an encyclopedia. This is fact based. Also, no need to name her parents three times and tell us she was in this after school activity. The article read like a fluff piece and you blanketly reverted all edits is vandalism. If a link was broken then you fix it. Thank you for your help todayXX — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE98:1510:4CEF:D74C:D98C:4A0E ( talk) 15:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Using two colons (instead of one) for indentation is not excessive, and it clearly indicates who is responding to whom. [1] Your time and effort might be better spent trying to comprehend WP:BLP than enforcing trivialities and writing insulting edit summaries. Cheers! 😜 Anythingyouwant ( talk) 20:06, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
( talk page stalker)My approach FWIW: 1. WP:THREAD provides guidelines on indentation. 2. Good indentation practices enhance readability. 3. Good readability enhances communication. 4. Good communication enhances the encyclopedia. 4. Many, many editors fail to indent correctly. Many aren't even aware of how to do it correctly. Therefore bad indentation is widsespread. 5. We can't correct everything without seeming like a disruptive OCD pedant, as well as using time that would be better spent on other things. 6. If you see indentation that is so bad that it really needs correction, correct it with an edit summary like: Corrent indents per WP:THREAD and WP:TPO bullet 7. No need for confrontational editsums, and in fact they are counterproductive. The bad indenters may see your edit. If they see it, they may improve their indenting practices. Or they may not. ― Mandruss ☎ 21:41, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your tireless devotion to the Wikipedia project. Thank you. -- Somedifferentstuff ( talk) 23:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, MrX, thanks very much for alerting KINGOFTO to the discretionary sanctions relevant to Donald Trump. I wish more people posted those alerts, it would make admins' jobs easier. I've re-templated him, though, so that he's told about the American politics and BLP decisions — it may be farfetched, but I worry he may get away with disregarding the notice if he doesn't get the right links. (OTOH, I don't worry that he removes those templates, as he no doubt will with mine too. That's on him.) For future reference: if you replace "topic" in the template {{subst:alert|topic}} with the standard initialism for the subject area in question, it will link correctly. In this case, those are ap and blp — there's a list of them here (scroll down). Thanks again! Bishonen | talk 04:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC).
Hello MrX. 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.
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. — MusikAnimal talk 23:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
How dare you accuse me of valdalism, for an edit correcting hyphens to ndashes per MOS:NDASH. And are you even aware of the new MoS concerning yr abbrevs in dateranges (per WP:DATERANGE). To accuse of vandalism on a good-faith (and in this case also correct) edit is hyper uncivil/bad faith and considered pretty serious fault. You don't know these things?! IHTS ( talk) 18:17, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
How prejudiced, aggressive, wrong, and uncivil. (You are an experienced WP editor??) IHTS ( talk) 18:31, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Time to request semi-prot do you think? Only in death does duty end ( talk) 14:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
CNN is being sued for exactly the nonesense you are putting in the wikipedia article. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/306106-breitbart-news-planning-lawsuit-against-major-media-company
-- Bongey ( talk) 23:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I accept your point that talk pages are for improvement of the article, so it's fair enough that you closed that discussion. However, I am curious as to why you said "no, you're incorrect". Would you care to explain? It's pretty clear that the root "homo" means mankind, not homosexual. Thanks PointOfPresence ( talk) 15:56, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Why did you erase my whole page before even talking about it??? All the theatre schools in Toronto have Wikipedia pages. Why did you erase the one I was building??
George Brown Theatre School, Ryerson Theatre School, National Theatre School -- all have pages. I don't understand why you did this to a new member of the wiki community. I worked for hours on that page. Please put it back.
EVerhaer ( talk) 22:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 22:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Stop editing the West Valley High School page and taking useful and factual information off of it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.214.196 ( talk) 22:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, MrX. 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)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi MrX/Archive. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 23:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
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.
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.
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) .
We're encouraged to be bold and add stuff if it's sourced. If someone reverts it then they ought to bring it up on the talk page. If they don't then I'll make a section to discuss any objections made.
Being reverted doesn't necessarily mean you are in the wrong, a lot of people revert anything they don't like regardless of it being sourced or not. Ranze ( talk) 18:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I started a post at ANI regarding your closure. Dan56 ( talk) 03:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
"Yes the genres should be added back in the infobox."does not give any reasoning at all. Similarly, the comment by troublednbored does not address the ambiguity of whether the source was speaking of genres or influences, or referring to some songs or the entire album. Ojorojo made compelling arguments, as did most everyone else. The lack of consensus is best exemplified by your own remark:
"We just differ on how we understand what he's saying, or the purpose/implciations of the genre field in the infobox, and you seem to be downplaying each source".It should not be surprising that this discussion would end in a stalemate, especially since it concerned the very contentious subject of genres in infoboxes.
I've reverted your edit on the Breitbart article as there is no consensus yet. If you believe there is a consensus please reply to the Talk page, to avoid an edit war. Phatwa ( talk) 16:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't want to be bold and revert a move on en.wiki because I am mainly active on it.wiki and on Commons and not much into mechanisms on here. As for the discussion in the said page, I raised twice the issue in the last six years but nobody cared. -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 14:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, now the article scudetto is consistent with the other ones in the other linguistic chapters. What's the request for the deletion of User:Blackcat/Scudetto? -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 14:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "
Request for review of Wurdi Youang RFC closure".The discussion is about the topic
Wurdi Youang. Thank you.
Mitch Ames (
talk)
08:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) ( user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. If you have questions, please contact me.-- Gwillhickers ( talk) 16:56, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I swear I'm not stalking - I just happen to watch the OSC article as well and saw this edit. Wasn't sure if you knew, but www.hatrack.com is OSC's website. So he is a reliable source for his opinion. It's a primary source, so no interpretation can be made, but it is an RS. It falls under WP:SELFSOURCE Morphh (talk) 19:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Please make sure, while deleting the contents, that the material is completely without a source. It seems some of the deletions of the content belonging to the page
Chathamangalam (Kannur) was done without proper research. A
Citation needed tag would have saved such a fast deletion of the content, meanwhile someone would have contributed with ample source material in English. Please do rethink on your action.
Also, please do go into Thabore, a place adjacent to Chathamangalam (Kannur) and kindly explain why so much of unsourced data in that page without any citation. I can also show many such pages where there is no proper citation and yet no deletions happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evergreen Chathamangalam ( talk • contribs) 05:50, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
@MrX, Thanks for your quick reply. I did indeed go through your personal profile before making the above comments. Gland to learn that you are very much keen on protecting Wikipedia against vandalism. But then again, most of the content written were news items in leading vernacular dailies including Malayala Manorama My concern here is why pages like Thabore, just 4 kilometers away from and as tiny as the place in discussion is having 8000+ digits narration, all of which has come without any citation. Please go to the references of the same page and see any oth those links are in any way related to the particular village. I have got a lot of newspaper reports in Malayalam regarding all the content in the page, as a soft copy. Can you pls. tell me if I can use them as a citation ?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.236.28 ( talk) 10:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.
ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE
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) 06:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .
AE does not require consensus among admins, or lengthy discussion
.
I'm not sure who told you that, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a reliable source. TimothyJosephWood 17:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello Mr.X, thank you for reading and tagging the article David Giorgio Mendes Nassi I wrote a while back. I've attempted to add new and informative citations to this article to hopefully satisfy the wikipedia requirements and would appreciate your feedback. I've encountered difficulties in citing alumni records and licensing details, as these are all fifty years old and not available online. Furthermore, I'm finding it hard to identify what facts actually require citation YonmaNm ( talk) 18:43, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
I have blocked all the IPs that have contributed to all these related articles and who are all editing from within 5 or 6 miles of the same UK geolocation. This is so obvious that besides the persistent removal of deletion templates, it is an attempt to evade 3R. The actual persistence in these edits can lead one to assume that it is spam or COI but it might not be easy to prove. I have not blocked the registered user in anticipation that they will in fact be caught in one of the IP blocks, so if they make an appeal for IP block exemption that will prove the obvious socking. We need to look out for the use of yet more IPs from that area. We can't do a range block there because they might well be public areas or hotspots, and not all are in the same IP ranges. I'll go back now and vote delete on all the AfD; if you have any thoughts , don't hesitate to drop me a line. I've also left this message at user talk:Robert McClenon. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 03:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for giving the admins a heads-up for me! -- Scjessey ( talk) 18:59, 30 December 2016 (UTC)