Welcome!
Hi, Stefka Bulgaria. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . Kleuske (talk) 17:36, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Ways to improve Tian Shan Astronomical Observatory
Hi, I'm Babymissfortune. Stefka Bulgaria, thanks for creating Tian Shan Astronomical Observatory!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add categories. Thanks.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Happy holidays! Babymissfortune 14:57, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Architecture of Almaty
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Architecture of Almaty, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:
- remove the text that looks like this:
{{proposed deletion/dated...}}
- save the page
Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Arthistorian1977 (talk) 14:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- Just checked this article. Good work, and I'm glad to see it survived the AfD process. Cheers.Nishidani (talk) 15:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the encourgament, Nishidani, this is always appreciated. Also for your help at WP:RSN :-) Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 11:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
MEK request
I would appreciate if you could "slow down" - e.g. do a small set of edits each day. Since some of your edit chains are blanket reverted by one of our colleagues (a behavior which I do not endorse) - it seems both of you need additional input to break the logjam (which I've been trying to provide). However - it is very difficult for me to get involved when the issue being contested is a very large diff, with an even larger talk page wall of text. If we could tackle smaller edits one at a time - it would be easier for me (and I presume others) to get involved. Icewhiz (talk) 07:46, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info Icewhiz, good to know, and will work on small edits at a time from now on. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 07:53, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Twinkle
It's much easier to file SPI reports with this tool, so I recommend activating it in Preferences/Gadgets. Cheers. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 14:14, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited People's Mujahedin of Iran, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Algiers Agreement (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Stefka Bulgaria, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to People's Mujahedin of Iran have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:30, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info, Dianaa, will paraphrase more and quote less from now on. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:38, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
![]() |
Hi Stefka Bulgaria! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
RfC on timeline of People's Mujahedin of Iran
Please see this RFC on article's timeline which you opened in September. I would consider this an 'exhausted' RfC because it looks like it didn't get support and is unlikely to get more in the future. (The only interested people were User:CaroleHenson and maybe User:Pahlevun, who aren't currently active). Do you want to withdraw it, and possibly add a more specific proposal in its place? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, will withdraw it. Thanks for the notice! Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 14:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
RfC close
Please note - this - I suggest you implement this (I'm frankly confused at the flux in the article) - please do cite the closed RfC talk section clearly in your edit summary. Icewhiz (talk) 15:04, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, will do. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 15:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Christianity Barnstar | |
Dear Stefka Bulgaria, I award you The Christianity Barnstar for all your hard work in WikiProject Christianity-related articles, especially your recent creation of Villa Malta (Cologne). Keep up the good work! Your efforts are making a difference here! With regards, AnupamTalk 20:12, 24 October 2018 (UTC) |
- :-) Thanks! Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 10:13, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 28
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited People's Mujahedin of Iran, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washington Institute (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Sources
Hi, may i suggest you to quote what the sources say instead of misrepresenting them as you did here ? This is a US claim which confirms Iranian claim, therefore, not only an Iranian claim, right ? Please let me know if you think i'm mistaken. Regards.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 23:29, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Wikaviani: - Sorry about this. I kept reading this part of the article: "The Iranians have no doubt who is responsible – Israel and the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, known by various acronyms", but missed the part where the US claimed it as well. Will be more careful; and thanks for letting me know. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 07:24, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Stefka Bulgaria: No worries, everybody can make mistakes, me the first;-) Cheers.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 19:42, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Some baklava for you!
Great article creation in Fritz Selbmann! Keep it up! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 11:21, 12 November 2018 (UTC) |
- Merci :-) Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 19:41, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
![]() | Hello, Stefka Bulgaria. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) |
Deletion discussion about Christa Ehrmann-Hämmerle
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria,
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Christa Ehrmann-Hämmerle should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christa Ehrmann-Hämmerle .
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Thanks,
Onel5969 TT me 14:22, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
![]() |
Hi Stefka Bulgaria! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Forbes
Hi Stefka Bulgaria. I wanted to let you know that Forbes contributor articles, such as this one that you referenced, are not considered reliable for Wikipedia's purposes. You can learn more here: WP:RSP#Forbes contributors. - MrX 🖋 12:23, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Hi MrX, thanks for the RS list, good source to have handy. Regards. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 19:38, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of 2018–2019 Iranian general strikes and protests for deletion
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220704214348im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5f/Ambox_warning_orange.svg/48px-Ambox_warning_orange.svg.png)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2018–2019 Iranian general strikes and protests is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018–2019 Iranian general strikes and protests until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mhhossein talk 13:44, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
ANI thread closed
I have [I have closed the ANI thread you were involved with. You are strongly warned to avoid making personal attacks, to stop treating Wikipedia as a battleground, to seek consensus rather than edit-warring over contentious material, and to be mindful of our policies about maintaining a neutral point of view." Please read through the comments there, and keep them in mind, so that a sanction does not prove necessary. Regards, Vanamonde (Talk) 06:47, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
- So.. you warn Stefka and and allow the disruptive editors to continue roaming (even Pahlevun)? Wikipedia gets more and more incompetent as each day goes, nice. Here's to a ton more articles being the target of pov-pushing. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- @HistoryofIran: No, I warned four editors, including Pahlevun. The discussion was open for over a month, and in that time no consensus for any sanction developed. If you want to open another discussion, feel free. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes I know, but let's be honest, you think a simple warning is gonna make any difference? This issue has been ongoing for so long (at least one year). This is just gonna be another major headache later on, if not several. Also, it's amazing that Stefka is getting grouped with the rest of those editors. It's clear that enough research has not been done on this issue. I mean, what's even the point in opening another discussion? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be rude, but frustrated and annoyed I indeed am. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- @HistoryofIran: I, personally, don't think a warning is going to make a difference. The community disagreed. I cannot implement a sanction for which no consensus exists. If you want to rail against the general editor body, go ahead, though it won't do you any good; there was no other possible outcome for that thread. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes I know, but let's be honest, you think a simple warning is gonna make any difference? This issue has been ongoing for so long (at least one year). This is just gonna be another major headache later on, if not several. Also, it's amazing that Stefka is getting grouped with the rest of those editors. It's clear that enough research has not been done on this issue. I mean, what's even the point in opening another discussion? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be rude, but frustrated and annoyed I indeed am. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- @HistoryofIran: No, I warned four editors, including Pahlevun. The discussion was open for over a month, and in that time no consensus for any sanction developed. If you want to open another discussion, feel free. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
@Vanamonde93: Thanks for your advice, but could you please help me understand this? Pahlevun removed vast amounts of information backed by RSs, made deceitful POV synthesis in polemical political articles, made libelous BLP violations, and continued to do so after being warned 4 times to stop. This is also been happening for over a year. I bring this to ANI, which is what I was told I should do, and I end up receiving the same sanction (warning) as them, even though all I did was express my concerns of POV-pushing at a RfA in commons. Did I miss something here? There were valid long-term issues with Pahlevun's edits, all of which Pahlevun failed to address or justify. Could you please help me understand this? Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 10:46, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- I doubt there's anything I can say that will satisfy you, but here's a couple of things you should remember. First, if there's genuine issues with an editor's behavior on en.wiki, they should be addressed here; opposing their RFA at commons, without making an effort to address your concerns here, isn't appropriate. Second, I did not warn you unilaterally; I did so based on a lack of consensus for anything else at ANI. Finally, you were not sanctioned, you were warned. There's a fundamental difference. If your behavior really is beyond reproach, then you won't face anything further. If Pahlevun stops editing disruptively, then the warning has worked. If he doesn't, he will face a sanction himself. To put it another way; misconduct by another user isn't an excuse for your own; it also makes your claims of misconduct on Pahlevun's part less tenable. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
apparent typo in one of your somewhat-recent edits
On May 5, in the article Albrechtsburg, you changed "The masterpiece of" to "The w of work of". I am pretty sure the "w of" should not be there, so I'll remove it myself in a little over a week if you neither do that nor respond here in the meantime, but I'm commenting in case you meant something else. JumpDiscont (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Just fixed it. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 10:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Notice of arbitration
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 15:05, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Excessive reverts
You can't keep reverting three times, just shy of 3RR, and not face sanctions for edit warring. I'm telling you now (count it as a warning): that just isn't tenable. El_C 16:17, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- @El C: I understand. The issue for me rises when several consecutive edits that violate policies (BIO, NPOV, etc.) are done simultaneously without any consensus, such as these recent ones: [1], [2]. It's a problem. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 20:46, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- It looks like both the pro- and anti-MEK camps, if you will, are doing that. The proposal I made for a new approach to editing the article might be able to address that zero-sum game. Providing everybody is on board. El_C 20:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Mansour Varasteh
Dear Stefka. You have now removed these same sources several times from the page, without explanation! There has been a talk topic about Mr. Varasteh's MEK membership for months now but you have not participated. The man is on video introducing himself as an MEK spokesperson. Why is this not good enough evidence? Please let us know in the talk page. Thanks. Iranians (talk) 04:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- Have replied on the Talk page. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Here we go again
[3] He's back at again with his mass removal of information, applause to the admins for looking the other way. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:13, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
- Sigh... Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 23:32, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Deletion discussion about Iuventa
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria,
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Slatersteven and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Iuventa should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iuventa .
You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Slatersteven}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Slatersteven (talk) 17:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Removing the Article from see also
Hi. I find that you removed three relevant article which named, Somayeh Mohammadi, Operation Mersad, Operation Forty Stars from the Maryam Rajavi's Article. They are relevant Article and I don't know why did you delete them? Please, return the article back to the see also section.Forest90 (talk) 08:58, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- These are more relevant to the MEK page than Maryam Rajavi; we've used MEK categories to help link these. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 13:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Please learn the problem
User Icewhiz fights a war against Polish people. This is a problem for Wikipedia, not for me. Regarding the Lublin spitting, it's a part of a long controversy. Spitting on a Polish ambassador is a bigger issue than spitting on a tourist. The person who spat on the ambassador has not been punished, the one who spat on the tourist was harsly punished. It's only one of thousands such incidents and historical fact manipulated by Icewhiz. Xx236 (talk) 07:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- A typical page by Icewhiz Disruption of Holocaust conference in Paris.Xx236 (talk) 08:14, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I see you know Icewhiz' creativity, but you see me. He creats 100 more edits than me. His method is to select anti-Polish statements using Google, to create a page or section, to oppose any corections. A non-real example Poles are pigs, let's google, let's write.Xx236 (talk) 08:53, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- The New Polish School of Holocaust Scholarship, disruption aside, was in fact a celebration or international recognition of the groundbreaking work done by Polish scholars in this field in the past twenty years. While the New school has faced reactionary government (PiS) push-back in recent years, it is very much a scholarly accomplishment that took place (mostly - there are two significant Polish expats as well - but they worked off Polish archives) inside Poland.[4] Icewhiz (talk) 09:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Xx236, making claims such as "how Icewhiz manipulates", etc, without evidence (as you've done here), constitutes WP:CASTING ASPERSIONS. If you have an issue with the sources Icewhiz is providing, then I'd advice that you focus on those instead. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 06:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- The New Polish School of Holocaust Scholarship, disruption aside, was in fact a celebration or international recognition of the groundbreaking work done by Polish scholars in this field in the past twenty years. While the New school has faced reactionary government (PiS) push-back in recent years, it is very much a scholarly accomplishment that took place (mostly - there are two significant Polish expats as well - but they worked off Polish archives) inside Poland.[4] Icewhiz (talk) 09:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Iranian politics general sanctions notice
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions to curtail disruption in articles related to post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. Before continuing to make edits that involve this topic, please read the full description of these sanctions here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.ArbCom 2019 election voter message
Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Saff V. (talk) 06:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Idris Ackamoor
See WP:DEADLINK. When you find a dead link, it's better to add the template {{dead}} rather than removing the link entirely. In both cases of links you removed, it was the work of mere seconds to find the new website addresses, and change them. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
April 2020
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Hermann Wilhelm Albert Blankenstein, from its old location at User:Stefka Bulgaria/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Wish you safety and health
Dear fellow editor. The world is struggling to stay safe from the harms of a some tens of nano-meters sized virus. I wish you and your dear ones full safety from the dangers of this unilateral love! Regards. --Mhhossein talk 08:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Hermann Wilhelm Albert Blankenstein has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
🌺Kori🌺 - (@) 20:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)Requesting expansion and update edit support
Hi,
Season's greetings
I am looking for proactive expansion and update support/input help any of the following (So far neglected but important topic) articles. If you can't spare time but if you know any good references you can note those on talk pages.
Your user ID was selected randomly (for sake of neutrality) from related other articles changes list related to Islamization
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku (talk) 11:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Bookku. Will have a look... Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 11:57, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your response and support. Very nice of you. And also please let me know if you can take a translation request too, for a women's rights related article Kithaab or may be you can suggest to some other translator.
Thanks and regards
Bookku (talk) 09:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria
Thank you for creating Hermann Wilhelm Albert Blankenstein.
User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Nice work.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
.
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
North8000 (talk) 13:15, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
You might be interested
Hi Stefka. I just noticed this article for the first time[5] I believe it might benefit from some proper sources/neutral writing. Would you perhaps be willing to check the article when you have time? - LouisAragon (talk) 23:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @LouisAragon:, yes, looks interesting, will have a look. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 06:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
On a lighter note
This edit summary, when taken literally, is pretty funny. I didn't notice until you pointed it out.VR talk 15:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
On a serious note
You asked me to collaborate with you, and I said I would. But this comment concerns me. Your comment After the close, VR was advised to continue discussion on either the article Talk page or personal Talk pages, but both Mhhossein and VR have a tendency to instead complain...
belies the fact that Chetsford actually "encouraged" me (their words, not mine) to seek review. But judging by your comment, you seem to have entirely missed that part of their comment.
Why do I bring this up? Because I have found that sometimes you don't seem to read my comment before opposing it. You have every right to disagree with me, but for that you need to read my comment first. For example, when I said the RfC was malformed your response indicates you totally misread my comment, until I repeated my comment and then corrected understood it.
Please take care.VR talk 19:22, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
- Rest assured that your comments/posts are being read very carefully. You were told that
"accusing someone of blindly voting without any form of ground definitely doesn't fit in the civil category"
, yet you alluded to that at ANI, and now you're doing it here. That you don't always express yourself clearly, or that there can be a miscommunication issue, are both also probabilities in these discussions, so let me close this conversation by saying that votes/comments on the MEK's Talk page are being read before they are posted, so please stop suggesting otherwise. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:34, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Ann Newman
Hi, Stefka. I don't agree with your close here. Will you reconsider, please?—S Marshall T/C 00:43, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Well, clearly there is no consensus to delete, since none of the three participants opted to do so. So, what sort of closure (or otherwise) result are you expecting with this challenge? El_C 00:48, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- I certainly don't see a consensus that receiving the Creu de Sant Jordi establishes notability. In my view the correct outcome would be "no consensus" (enabling me to promptly renominate it for deletion).—S Marshall T/C 00:57, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Two of the three participants seem to think so, though I agree with you that it is puzzling to conceive that being a recipient of this award merits a page. El_C 01:05, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- There were four participants; if you're going to count Davidpar who created the page, then it's only fair to count me. :) I don't think pburka's contribution makes sense. I mean, yes, Ms Newman has translated an article that's notable. I translated Catherine Bréchignac: does that make me notable? We'd normally say that notability isn't inherited.—S Marshall T/C 01:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- For sure, fair points. The correct outcome is probably for the page to be deleted at this time. But I'm not sure I know how to make that happen, procedurally. El_C 01:15, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ideally, Stefka would either relist, or else reclose as no consensus enabling me to renominate for deletion. Less ideally we could go to deletion review seeking one of those outcomes.—S Marshall T/C 01:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Right. Stefka Bulgaria, I would encourage you to supplant the closure with a relist. The strength of the arguments, irrespective of the tally, seems rather frail. El_C 01:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
I've self-reverted my close so that someone else can close that AfD. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited People's Mujahedin of Iran, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MOIS. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
AfD Closing/Relisting
Hi I'm Barkeep49, an administrator here. I am writing to ask that you please stop closing/relisting Articles for Deletion discussions. You attracted my attention after you relisted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rameez Raja (actor) for which there was a bot notice that it was eligible for soft deletion. This should have been a hint that it was not an appropriate close. I then came to your talk page and saw the discussion about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Ann Newman. I then opened up your contribuations and saw Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Calderón which you closed as no consensus. This might have been appropriate when weighting for CONSENSUS, but it was not a clear close given that numerically more editors favored keep 5-3 and thus not a good discussion for a non-adminstrator close. The last AfD I checked was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Empowerment Experiment which was also eligible for soft deletion. While four is not a huge sample it is concerning that literally every AfD close I checked had an issue. This suggests that you would be better off participating at AfD (we need more participants) than closing discussions at this time. Barkeep49 (talk) 20:33, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Barkeep49, I have no problems with focusing on other aspects at AfD. I just don't see what the big problem is with my work there:
- About relisting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rameez Raja (actor), I had missed the WP:NOQUORUM clause, and thought the article could do with more than one vote before being deleted.
- About relisting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Ann Newman, that ended up in "no-consensus"; with the article being kept (which is the consensus I had given it).
- About closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Calderón as no consensus, as I see it, the article will likely end up in "no-consensus" or being kept.
- About relisting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Empowerment Experiment , I also thought it could do with more than a single vote before being closed.
- To me, these actions don't seem unreasonable, but I don't mind focusing on other aspects of the AfD process. Regards, Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 16:12, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- Stefka Bulgaria, no consensus and keep both mean that the article remains. However, there are differences - for instance renominating a short time after a keep AfD is disruptive but it's not disruptive for a no consensus. I appreciate your willingness to focus your energies in other ways. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Hamas RFC
Could you please reconsider your vote at least regarding UN resolution please read arguments by me and François Robere --Shrike (talk) 13:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Shrike, Ok, will have a look at your arguments there and re-evaluate. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 19:47, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Could you please reconsider your vote at least regarding UN resolution please read arguments by everyone else except Shrike and François Robere Selfstudier (talk) 22:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
For your highly valuable contributions to site. Keep up the good work! Your efforts are greatly appreciated. Hope to see you back in the Wikipedian scene soon :). HistoryofIran (talk) 05:01, 15 November 2020 (UTC) |
- Hi HistoryofIran; thank you for the encouragement. Coming from you, it means a lot. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 16:24, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Requesting some article expansion help
Greetings,
It seems you also work on articles related to Iran, I was looking for article expansion help at articles like Islamic advice literature, Draft:Aurats (word) an article about historical linguistics and in article Slavery in Iran several sections are in need of expansion besides presently it has no coverage on female slavery in Iran. Please do visit those articles as and when time permits you and pl. do help in article expansions if those topics interest you.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku (talk) 16:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
- Greetings, Bookku. Ok, would be glad to get involved. Will have a look in the coming days. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 18:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Stefka Bulgaria:Thanks for your positive consideration, looking forward to your continued support. Warm regards Bookku (talk) 07:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Bookku: sorry for the delay; was away from Wikipedia. Will have a look at this now. If there are any particular articles you'd like me to look at please let me know. Looking forward to working with you on this. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 15:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Stefka Bulgaria:Thanks for your positive consideration, looking forward to your continued support. Warm regards Bookku (talk) 07:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Stefka Bulgaria:Thanks for your proactive contributions at Draft:Aurats (word) and Islamic advice literature.
- As such I do have a longer list of articles which is need of support. Part of the same I am sharing below please do support which you would be interested in.
- 1) Repeated insertion of Original research like this edit dif @ Gender roles in Islam need to be addressed. Due to 3R rule I could not revert those edits again, may be you can visit the same.
- 2) Need help in improving Opposition to Valentine's day in Iran, a comparable article Valentine's Day in Pakistan may be helpful.
- 3) Need article improvement help @ Draft:Avret Esir Pazarları (an article about female slavery of common women in Ottoman times,) on the same lines I had requested article expansion help in article Slavery in Iran too.
- 4) Drafts initiated by me Draft:Women, conflict and conflict zones, Draft:Sexual politics (Gender politics) have been listed for deletion since not updated for last five months, I am looking for some help in these draft expansions.
- 5) Drafts initiated by me Draft:Sexual politics in Muslim societies, Draft:Autobiographies of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women and Draft:Feminism in Urdu literature got deleted due to no edits in previous six months. Specially I am looking for some proactive support in recovering and expanding Draft:Sexual politics in Muslim societies.
- 6) I am also looking for article expansion support @ Draft:Hermeneutics of feminism in Sikhism to develop article on same lines of Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam
- 7) Last but not least, Draft:Women's rights in Muslim societies, Draft:Expressions of Muslim and Ex-Muslim Women through media interactions
- I know my list is much longer :) but just requesting your help in topics whichever interest you among above.
- It is very nice of you, you have been so much supportive. Thanks again and warm regards Bookku (talk) 08:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Bookku: Glad to help. Will have a look at these. If there is anything else you'd like to look at let me know! Warm regards, Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 11:42, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- It is very nice of you, you have been so much supportive. Thanks again and warm regards Bookku (talk) 08:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Erwin Henning moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Erwin Henning, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 TT me 00:09, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
MEK page
Hi Stefka. I just saw the banner you put in your talk page. Have you left Wikpedia? If you're still around, please take a look at this conversation on the MEK page. Thanks. Hope you're doing well. Idealigic (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Help needed with possible violation. Thank you. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 15:52, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Iranian opposition articles (People's Mujahedin of Iran) and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Idealigic (talk) 09:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Arbitration case opened
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 6, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️Talk/CCI guide 18:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, Moneytrees. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Left you a note
Hey,
I left you a note here. It is motivated by good-faith and if you see any mistakes in my evidence I too would like it if you can let me know and I will try to correct myself ASAP. I apologize in advance if it comes across as offensive, that's not my intention.VR talk 18:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hey, I'm on holidays at the moment; took some time off today to answer at ArbCom because of today's deadline. Will get back to you as soon as I get another strong internet connection. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Proposed decision posted at the open Iranian politics case
In the open Iranian politics arbitration case, a number of remedies and finding of facts have been proposed, some of which relate to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️Talk/CCI guide 01:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian politics closed
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- (i) The community-authorized general sanctions for post-1978 Iranian politics are hereby superseded and replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.(ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.(iii) Notifications issued under Post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from their date of issue, then expire.(iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the arbitration enforcement log.(v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.(vi) Administrators who have enforced the Post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
- Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to take appropriate actions (pursuant to the discretionary sanctions authorization) to facilitate consensus through moderation of any Requests for Comments (RfC). These actions may include, but are not limited to:
- moratoriums up to one year on initiating RfCs on a particular dispute,
- word and/or diff limits on all RfC participants,
- bans on editors who have disrupted consensus-finding from participation in a particular RfC, and
- sectioned commenting rules in RfCs.
- BarcrMac (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Idealigic (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Mhhossein (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality and further incivility.
- Mhhossein (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Stefka Bulgaria (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Vice regent (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality.
For the Arbitration Committee, GeneralNotability (talk) 16:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian politics closed
New page reviewer granted
Hi Stefka Bulgaria. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers
" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:
- Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
- If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
- Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 19:06, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Phil Doley
Just setting up page. Linking back the Australian Christian Churches pastors page.
Will eventually build content ShootingStar2000 (talk) 10:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi ShootingStar2000: my advice would be to first write the article in your sandbox, and then submit it for review. This way we can check if the article meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. Let me know if you have any other questions. Best, Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 10:48, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
November 2021 backlog drive
New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
Alfie shearing
Good catch on this. I actually deleted it as WP:G3, reverted the vandalism on Stevenage F.C. and indef blocked the creator. To nitpick, "Stevenage manager" (ie: managing a fully professional league-level football club) is a claim of importance; however the manager is Alex Revell so it's not credible - so A7 would have worked as well. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:06, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks :-) Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 18:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello Stefka Bulgaria. Really appreciate your feedback on the article about Lowes Financial Management. Are there any further recommendations on how to defend the page importance? Like any other privately owned company which has a presence on Wikipedia, Lowes also deserve recognition and seeks for acknowledged digital footprint. It is a big company run by the family for 2 generations now, with a great history of dealing with finances in North East, famous for being the first to launch Structured Products for retail in the United Kingdom. I am grateful for any feedback from you, hope to hear from you soon.
- I have replied on the article's talk page. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 10:52, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Joshua Weissman
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria,
Thank you for moving this article to Draft space as it is clearly not in shape for the main space of the project. When you do this, please take a moment and tag the original page for speedy deletion, CSD R2 so that an admin can delete the redirect from main space to Draft space. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 01:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hey Liz, thanks for letting me know. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:36, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Erwin Henning
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Erwin Henning, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
New page reviewer granted
Hi Stefka Bulgaria. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers
" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:
- Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
- If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
- Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 16:37, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Erwin Henning
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20220704214348im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1d/Information_icon4.svg/48px-Information_icon4.svg.png)
Hello, Stefka Bulgaria. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Erwin Henning".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Okay
Sorry i was not ready to create a page but please do'nt block me Amilokuhle (talk) 09:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi, There! ![Chat Flat Icon GIF Animation.gif](https://web.archive.org/web/20220704214348im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Chat_Flat_Icon_GIF_Animation.gif/30px-Chat_Flat_Icon_GIF_Animation.gif)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thanks for paying attention to the article Nattha Records, I'll fix it right away. Can you shape me? 𝚀𝚞𝚎𝚎𝚗 𝚁𝚎𝚜𝚙☹𝚗𝚍 |
- Hi Queen Respond, thank you for the barnstar. To get the article in shape, you'll need more reliable sources that show why the article is notable. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 09:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Good morning!!
I understood the deletion of the Ace Aura page now. Sorry for wasting your time. The previous admin moved the article to the draftspace because of poorly sourced material. So i thought that was the main problem (i didn't probably improved at all though, but anyways...) and didn't really clicked the fact he don't have the required notability to be on Wikipedia. My apologies, and have a great day!. Skydream1721 (talk) 08:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for letting me know. Like what others have said, I would also recommend that you stick to reliable sources only. If you can't find many about this topic, then the topic might be WP:TOOSOON (as others also already have said). Good luck. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Re: Speedy deletion nomination of Beijing 2008 (painting)
- I haven't translated the full content yet. It's not propaganda but a famous painting. --Beta Lohman※Office box 08:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that the article is "propaganda", I'm saying that a quick google search did not show that the painting (or painter) was notable. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, no English articles show its notable. However, it's a famous painting in the Chinese internet. --Beta Lohman※Office box 08:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- So, anyway. I will ask for a speedy deletion by G7, and will rebuild it later. --Beta Lohman※Office box 08:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- See the full content of zh:北京2008 (油画) on the Chinese Wikipedia. --Beta Lohman※Office box 08:44, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
New message from Osarius
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ace Aura. Osarius 09:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello Stefka Bulgaria,
At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.
Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.
In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 741 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 1032 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.
This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello Stefka Bulgaria,
- Backlog status
At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.
Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]
In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).
While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).
- Backlog drive
A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
- TIP – New school articles
Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
- Misc
There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}
, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
>NPP backlog: 11164 as of 21:30, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.
- Reminders
- Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
- If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing
{{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page. - If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
- To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
- Notes
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |