- Dispute resolution clause: By posting on my user talk page, you agree to resolve all disputes that may arise from your interactions with me through the dispute resolution processes offered within the Wikipedia Community. BD2412
- Archives
- By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):
- Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th-5th
- Misc.-1st-2d-3d-4th/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd-3rd/Vandalism
- Dated (beginning June 1, 2009):
- 001-002-003-004-005-006-007-008-009-010-011-012-013-014-015-016-017
- 018-019-020-021-022-023-024-025-026-027-028-029-030-031-032-033-034
- 035-036-037-038-039-040-041-042-043-044-045-046-047-048-049-050
"Princeton" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Princeton and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 2#Princeton until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 14:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Canvassing and edit warring
Can you please provide input [| here ]. There is an editor canvassing other editors by pinging them in a discussion and a topic they have nothing to do with. These editors are also making edits while an ongoing discussion is happening on the talk page without contributing to the discussion. Thanks in advance. TruthGuardians (talk) 16:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Restoring comments on other’s talkpages
That is not allowed, please refrain from doing so. And stop harassing me--CreecregofLife (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- I merely pointed out that in your reversion of reliably sourced content with which you disagree, you also reverted the addition of citations unrelated to that content. This is not the first time you have made exactly that error. Please be more cognizant of the consequences of your edits. BD2412 T 19:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- No you didn’t. You restored comments I had already removed. I’m getting really fed up with you CreecregofLife (talk) 21:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A great many editors and admins seems to be really fed up with you. Perhaps it's not an "everyone else" problem. BD2412 T 22:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A "great many"? Care to have any actual recent examples? Because I haven't done anything to warrant such CreecregofLife (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- The last time you were brought to ANI by another editor, you narrowly avoided at least a one month site ban. BD2412 T 23:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A "great many"? Care to have any actual recent examples? Because I haven't done anything to warrant such CreecregofLife (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A great many editors and admins seems to be really fed up with you. Perhaps it's not an "everyone else" problem. BD2412 T 22:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- No you didn’t. You restored comments I had already removed. I’m getting really fed up with you CreecregofLife (talk) 21:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 22:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Steel1943 (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the List of municipal flags in the Czech Republic
I know you are aware that the List of municipal flags in the Czech Republic article is deleted for WP:NOTGALLERY but can it be recreated if all information about the flags are added? I had transferred the gallery to Wikimedia Commons and added information from REKOS (I had translate from Czech because the deleted article does not have a Czech Wikipedia page yet) and other sites of municipalities. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- If you intend to do that, I would suggest creating a draft and then submitting it for administrative review. BD2412 T 00:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK thanks. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Old IP talk
Hi BD2412, I noticed that you have been removing old warnings from IP talkpages. I have been operating MalnadachBot to fix Lint errors sitewide, many of which are in old IP talk pages. Due to this, there are many pages where my bot has fixed Lint errors, followed by you removing the page text [1] [2]. This makes the preceding bot edit redundant. It will be great if we can coordinate to avoid unnecesary edits. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 08:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- creating a guideline to blank an IPs talk page after a certain time (either from latest TP activity, or IP's contribution), and then a bot for blanking such talkpages using these parameters would be a good idea. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah. I volunteer to create such a bot task if there is consensus for it. Deletion of old IP talkpages used to be done years ago, but was stopped for some reason. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Deletion hides potentially useful edit history, as when a defunct occasional IP vandal returns after years of absence and returns to their previous patterns. Blanking is preferred because it reduces link load (the crudding up of "What links here" pages) and avoids confusion on the part of legitimate new editors editing from an old IP, and seeing a bunch of warnings apparently directed at them. When we switched from deletion to blanking, I had to restore-and-blank about a thousand IP talk pages that I had previously deleted. BD2412 T 12:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. Since this is a fairly staraightforward and noncontroversial task, I think it is better done by a bot. A cursory search shows me that there is at least 1.5 million IP talk pages without a block notice and has not received any message after 2013. Considering the number of the pages involved, I am thinking about holding an RFC at WP:VPR and submitting a WP:BRFA if there is consensus for it. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 13:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've been down that road without success, but it was several years ago, so perhaps times have changed. BD2412 T 13:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Lets follow this up at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Draft RFC: Bot to blank old IP talkpages. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Deletion hides potentially useful edit history, as when a defunct occasional IP vandal returns after years of absence and returns to their previous patterns. Blanking is preferred because it reduces link load (the crudding up of "What links here" pages) and avoids confusion on the part of legitimate new editors editing from an old IP, and seeing a bunch of warnings apparently directed at them. When we switched from deletion to blanking, I had to restore-and-blank about a thousand IP talk pages that I had previously deleted. BD2412 T 12:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Mount Rushmore in popular culture for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Rushmore in popular culture 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.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- This is a thoughtless nomination, and an insincere one given the lack of effort to examine the article. BD2412 T 12:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for trying to save this. I've left my review and tags. The good news is that I now believe this topic is notable, and we already have sufficient content for a stub. The bad news is that I still believe 95% of the current content has to be removed. But I think whatever articl emerges from this trial by fire will be much more useful to the readers than the older page (sometimes more is not better). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Naruto-Rushmore.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Naruto-Rushmore.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Kim Iversen
Hi, can you refund her article for me? I will try to work on it and address the concerns made at AFD. Eden5 (talk) 05:44, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Eden5: Done; see Draft:Kim Iversen. Cheers! BD2412 T 05:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Templating out IP talk space messages
{{OW}} belongs below {{Shared IP}}. Please don't remove those Shared templates, they're useful to admins. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:33, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Having been an administrator on this project for over 15 years, I am fairly well-versed in what is useful to admins. Templates on pages that have not been touched for many years, and from IP addresses that have not been used to edit for many years, are not actually particularly useful. IP ranges get reassigned from time to time, and the fact that a given IP address has seen no activity for multiple years suggests that information about it may be out of date. BD2412 T 16:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
What determines when warnings are ancient and should be removed? I've been doing it manually when I see a lot of warnings over three or four years old when leaving messages for IPs.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- We have had a few discussions about this before (including one ongoing at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC: Bot to blank old IP talkpages), and there is sort of a sliding scale. It depends how many warnings there are, and what sort. A good rule is that anything over five years old can be dispensed with. If there's a page with just one warning that's three years old, I'll remove it. BD2412 T 21:28, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Shopping spree
The article Shopping spree has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Two redirects and an item currently at prod.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- De-PRODed; per WP:DABMENTION, it is perfectly permissible to have a disambiguation page containing only links to redirects, if the name is mentioned in the target articles. BD2412 T 17:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello BD2412,
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 05:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Help with RfC formatting
Will you please assist me with the formatting of starting an RFC here as it is my first time? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_best-selling_albums#It_is_time_to_raise_Thriller’s_claimed_sales_to_100m TruthGuardians (talk) 15:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Update: legobot has fixed formatting, but perhaps you would like to add your input. Thanks.TruthGuardians (talk) 15:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Writer's Barnstar | |
Great job writing all these law articles (I have just started reviewing them). | Zippybonzo | Talk | 18:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC) |
"Czechoslovak" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Czechoslovak and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 31#Czechoslovak until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting. Czechoslovakia was the original longstanding target of the term from when I created this redirect in 2014 until a few months ago when it was changed without discussion. BD2412 T 04:10, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
"Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 6#Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ZandDev (msg) 12:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Your message
Hello. In answer to your message, I think the writ de apostata capiendo satisfies GNG. I think the best course of action would be to expand the article. If, after the expansion, you are still not happy, the article can be still be merged. I am still looking at the other articles. If they do not satisfy GNG, they should be merged to Writ or to another suitable target. (I have determined that chartis reddendis is actually a form of detinue, so could be merged there). Best regards. James500 (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Dewey, Cheatem & Howe for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dewey, Cheatem & Howe (2nd nomination) 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.
Amisom (talk) 09:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have responded in the discussion, and have proposed to merge this up. BD2412 T 18:33, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguators barnstar
The Disambiguator's Barnstar | ||
The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators. Thanks for disambiguating the Junior backlog. --I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 11:09, 17 June 2022 (UTC) |
I love your AWB run
for the comma issues you're fixing, of course, but selfishly because when I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Futsal positions, I ended up with hundreds of futsal players on my watchlist. I had gone through with a command-f to find as many of them as I could, but edits like this jabe helped my further pruning when they show in my watchlist. Thanks! Star Mississippi 12:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Comma-spacing is unfortunately a perpetual issue, but here we are. BD2412 T 17:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Appealing the closure of an RfC
BD2412, what is the proper manner of appealing the closure of an RfC? Seems like the closing admin of this RfC did not review the body of arguments presented in the discussion, calling it all a "clusterfest." There is much grounds for an appeal. Israell (talk) 12:16, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- It's not something I have actually had to do before. We have processes for reviewing AfD and MR closes, so I would think that there is an analogous process for reviewing RfC closes. I am just not familiar with what that process is. BD2412 T 14:45, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I believe WP:AN is the default venue for appeals of miscellaneous closures that aren't covered by the RM and AFD processes mentioned above... Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amakuru, thanks, that is some high-quality talk-page stalking. BD2412 T 15:40, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Amakuru. Thanks, BD2412. I've initiated an appeal process at ANI. Israell (talk) 08:02, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amakuru, thanks, that is some high-quality talk-page stalking. BD2412 T 15:40, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I believe WP:AN is the default venue for appeals of miscellaneous closures that aren't covered by the RM and AFD processes mentioned above... Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello BD2412,
- 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: 11546 as of 19:15, 3 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) 10:01, 24 June 2022 (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 Appealing the closure of an RfC. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:05, 26 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. |