User talk:49ersBelongInSanFrancisco/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, good luck, and have fun. – Aboutmovies (talk) 08:34, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:42, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing the duplication

Hey, I saw that you deleted the duplicate article that i posted and wanted to thank you noticing its redundancy!

(I apologize if I'm not using this correctly, I never used this feature before). The Red Rat Writer (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

IPs similar to 175.120.229.46

Hey man, while adding those vandalism templates to pages like this is certainly standard procedure, if you see this automated vandalism with similar edit summaries, feel free to just report to AIV with a link to Special:AbuseFilter/815. Cheers, —GFOLEY FOUR!— 09:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Economic importance of bacteria

I'm terribly sorry, we had an edit conflict just now, stimulated by your absolutely correct observations on this article: I didn't mean to tread on you. I've suggested a way ahead on the talk page; there is more than enough work here for everyone. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

You asked what else there was to do; the main task is surely to add citations to the uncited material. As that is done, new materials will certainly come to light. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For improving Wheels For Wishes, a highly misleading ADVERT before you made the effort to write - and source - it right. E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 18,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Overprescription

I am certain this can be expanded into an article; there have been many articles and essays about this phenomenon beyond defining it. I de-prodded it. Bearian (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Kelly leonard

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kelly leonard, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: previously declined. Do not retag pages an admin already declined. Doing so can be considered admin-shopping. Thank you. SoWhy 08:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Deletion Of "List Of Gaming Computers"

Can I Hide The Article And Edit It? N64 Gamer 500 (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

@N64 Gamer 500: I appreciate your willingness to edit the article. It looks like you have improved it, but I don't know that it is appropriate subject matter for an encyclopedia no matter how much energy you put into it. I don't want you to waste your time on an article that might not be sustainable, so I'm going to put it up for discussion now so that there's a definite judgment one way or the other. Thanks for checking in! 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Response to Your Message

Hi there, I'm not sure if this is the right way to leave a message, but I hope I'm doing the right thing. You have message me with regards to a section that I removed from a Wiki page. The reason is that I do not believe the events mentioned are correct and best representative to the truth. I have the feeling that whoever wrote these sections is/are only trying to give themselves some exposure and promotion at the expense of truth. I'm not sure if removing the section was the best thing to do, but I believe that when some individuals' names are mentioned in an incorrect manner, sections like those should not be up. Please let me know what you think. Sincerely.

I also apologize for having removed the sections again. I did that before noticing your message. Thank you. 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SophieTrophie (talk • contribs) 08:10, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@SophieTrophie: Hi SophieTrophie, thanks for sharing your concerns. In general, it is frowned upon to delete large sections of a Wikipedia article without explanation. When there's no explanation it's impossible to know if you deleted a large section by accident, because you simply didn't like it, or because it was incorrect. If you have a more balanced perspective that is backed by independent sources, I'd strongly encourage you to edit the page and incorporate those new sources. If you think the whole section is not correct, you can give an explanation in your edit summary message (the box below the editing window) or you can take the discussion to the article's talk page (Talk:Student_Federation_of_the_University_of_Ottawa). Thanks!49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 10:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Benutzer

(Move log); 07:28 . . 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk | contribs) moved page Benutzer:Die freiburgerin/Artikelentwurf to Perfect PDF Premium ‎(Moving to article name)

Benutzer is German for User. I'd moved the previous version to User:Die freiburgerin/Artikelentwurf, It's starting to look like Die freiburgerin isn't interested in following advice. Cabayi (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 810 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
  • Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

  • Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
  • The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

  • Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
  • Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

  • On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
  • Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Kudpung. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, سید وحید اشرف, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Just curious...

...are the 49ers talking about leaving SF? Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken:They left the City for Santa Clara a couple years ago.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 07:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Facepalm Facepalm Of course they did. As a New Yorker, I'm so used to our football teams not playing in New York City, and not even in New York State, that I interpreted your name as meaning that the 49ers were going to leave the San Francisco area for some other metropolitan area, but completely forgot that the new stadium wasn't in the city. Sorry about that.
BTW, San Francisco is my second-favorite city in the U.S. (after NYC), and I'm always bummed that I spend more time (because of my work) in Los Angeles then I do in SF -- although I was there in April. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Steve Wynn, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you.

That edit is concerning a widely-reported controversy. The paragraph is full of different major media citations. You may revise the words or raise any specific question on the talk page. Rude removal of all words without really reading the sources or providing sound reasons on the talk page is kind of vandalism. --Wildcursive (talk) 06:19, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Why my links are inappropriate?

Comment below left by User:JaneySmith

Thank you for your remark! I have read the guidelines once again and noticed that “External links” section should be kept minimal, and, according to this excerpt: “If the website or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source for the article, and citing it.”, should I cite the content of a page I linked to? But then it would be a reference, wouldn’t it? I am a bit confused here. I would like to continue adding the links to the pages with consumers reviewing Canadian insurance companies, but I would also like to know if I would be banned for this. I welcome any commentary, tips, and links to guidelines, which can help in improving my work here. I am new on Wiki, but I want to become a part of the family and be useful to this community. Thank you! P.S. I do not affiliate myself to Insureye Reviews Platform. I found this site a quite long age. All pages I link to are not commercial, though they do mention the possibility of using Insureye services. The site collects a lot of real reviews of Canadian insurance companies’ services and I thought that they might be useful for readers of Wikipedia. Anyway, why do you consider it to be spamming?

Reply

@JaneySmith: You added links to the same for-profit insurance review site to 30+ articles with very spammy titles. You have made no other meaningful contributions to the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is often vandalized by website owners who want to promote their website in Wikipedia or think that it will help their search rankings. This instance seemed to fit all the patterns: a for-profit site copying links to many Wikipedia pages without meaningful interactions. If you'd like to learn more about proper external links, please visit Wikipedia:External links. Please also consider Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming. If you think that your links still pass the tests in those articles please feel free to try again and explain in your edit summary why the link is proper, but I would strongly advise against trying 30+ at a time again.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
  • Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

  • If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

  • A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
  • Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
  • The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Rollback

I have granted the "rollbacker" permission to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 06:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!
The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
  • We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

  • We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

  • ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
  • Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Elemental Sculpture Park

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Elemental Sculpture Park, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: if any reliable sources exist, that's enough to indicate significance. Use WP:AFD instead. Thank you. SoWhy 08:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Argument against Proposed deletion of WAPT (deployment software)

Hi 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco,

you have added the "Proposed deletion" header to the article WAPT (deployment software) that I added yesterday evening. This article is a translation of the same page in French. Even though it may not be that notorious in the US, it is on this side of the Atlantic (mostly in French speaking countries).

To address the problems mentioned in the header, like the notoriety, I have already mentioned in the article that it has been audited and certified for Elementary Security Level (CSPN) by ANSSI, the French national cyberdefense Agency, which would be the French equivalent of NIST. CSPN is a kind of "light" version of Common Criteria certification. Actually WAPT just went through the "Elementary Qualification" process of ANSSI, which is the next step in certification process, but it has not yet been published on the ANSSI site. Indeed WAPT is heavily used in French administrations and certification.

WAPT is also part of curriculum in colleges and universities (you can find it mentioned on BCS programs), and it has just crossed the 400k desktops installed base.

The only caveat I would agree to is that the material around WAPT is still mostly in French. To address this issue, there has been a lot of work around internationalization of the project both on the software, the documentation and the community.

Cardondenis (talk) 10:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I happen to agree with that PROD, and have AfD'd the article. Also, I seem to hear some quacking coming from the article history. Kleuske (talk) 21:16, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
Notability
General notability guideline
Subject-specific guidelines
See also

ACTRIAL:

  • ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

  • Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

  • While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

  • The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.
To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm SshibumXZ. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Zachariyapothan Jeevichirippundu (2017 film), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.


Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 06:00, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, for further context, I unreviewed the article by mistake, and would like apologise for the same.
Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 06:02, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Alan Newell (Computer Scientist)

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alan Newell (Computer Scientist), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being professor at a notable university or college indicates importance/significance (WP:CCSI#ACADEMIC). Thank you. SoWhy 07:29, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@SoWhy:, I was following WP:SCHOLAR which I believe is the official policy as to notability. There are 9 listed criteria and I do not see this individual meeting any of them. Under WP:SCHOLAR, simply being a professor is not supposed to confer notability in the absence of significant contributions to the field, significant awards, etc. That said, I understand that in practice (as demonstrated by WP:CCSI#ACADEMIC) the standards are often more loose for full professors at notable universities. I appreciate your hard work putting that page together and it's an excellent guide to actual practice. I'll keep in mind that page and will consider a BLP PROD or AFD if I encounter a similar situation, so that more voices can be heard in the discussion.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:52, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
No doubt it is the guideline on notability. However, A7 is not about notability but explicitly a lower standard. Professoral notability is actually a very tricky field with approx. 50% keep-delete split at AFD, so it's not really something a single admin should decide. You can always use (BLP)PROD or AFD of course. Regards SoWhy 14:30, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Anthony Borges

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anthony Borges, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: he might be notable enough to have a standalone article but even if not, his name is a plausible search term for the shooting and should at least be redirected there. Thank you. SoWhy 11:37, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

PS: A10 does not apply if the subject is not covered in the page you mention as a duplicate. The policy explicitly states This does not include [...] any article that expands or reorganizes an existing one or that contains referenced, mergeable material. Please be more careful in future and instead of tagging for speedy deletion, consider performing or proposing a merge per WP:ATD-M. Regards SoWhy 11:44, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
@SoWhy:, thank you for the information and clarification. I was basing my determination that the person was non-notable on the guidance in WP:CRIME that individuals whose notability comes as victims of crime should have their stories covered (if at all) in the article about the applicable crime. I did not see meaningful new content in his article (it was very short and focused on a nickname) that added meaningfully to the article, but I understand why the stronger path would be a merge/redirect. Next time I'll merge/redirect rather than CSD if people may be searching for the name of the individual.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:46, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
CSD and ATD are policy, CRIME is only a guideline about notability and notability has no place in speedy deletion (see above as well). After all, the article you mentioned did not contain any information about him, so if I had deleted his article, the information would be gone completely, which is not a desirable result, is it? Bottom line, only tag for deletion if no alternatives exist (WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE). The information compiled at User:SoWhy/SDA might be helpful to you. Regards SoWhy 14:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Memorize Software

I hope you don't mind that I've tagged for a G11 the article you'd PRODed. The advertising nature of the article is more obvious in the version before the author removed his name from the infobox. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 05:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Cabayi: - no problem at all, of course. I'm trying to be sensitive to not excessively tagging as CSD but I agree that one was totally appropriate for it with that additional context. Thanks for doing it. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 04:38, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Converted PROD to AfD

Hi, your PROD tag had been deleted, but I agree with the deletion. Maybe you'd like to add your original arguments to the discussion, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Highway_Rider_(Mobile_Game)&action=history

Thank you ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for having reviewed my Petrus Pavlicek translation.

I still cannot link it to the original german page: I was not allowed to use the translation tool (I'm not an editor...). I wonder if you could possibly do it. Thanks! Cebraz (talk) 12:17, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

What is political?

Hi,

You deleted my three sentence contribution to Mess of pottage because you said it was too political and 'less than neutral'.

Just to refresh your memory here it is:

A recent public use was in a protest rally against the proposed tourist cable car route on kunanyi/Mt [Wellington]. The multi-award winning author, Richard Flanagan, used the term in his speech; 'We see our soul being sold for a mess of pottage and there is no end to the shame and the sadness that we must endure in order to have more and more tourists. And you have to ask: why is this government more interested in building a cable car for tourists than it is in building homes for homeless Tasmanians?'[1]

I am uncertain about how you decided that in your opinion it is too political and you felt free to delete it without comment, instead of editing it to conform to your opinion.

Is it because I wrote, A recent public use was in a protest rally, which it was and has been reported as such in Australian national media? Is that too political and not neutral?

Is it because I added a description of the rally to give context to A recent public use and to explain why there was a rally and linked to that topic which is already in Wikipedia? (proposed tourist cable car route on kunanyi/Mt [Wellington].) Should that section of the Wikipedia entry on Mt Wellington be deleted as well?

Is it because I added the Aboriginal name for Mt Wellington? Adding indigenous names to landmarks in Australia has been controversial in the past among politically conservative men, but the fact is that it is now the official name as noted in the first sentence of it's Wikipedia entry; 'Mount Wellington, officially kunanyi / Mount Wellington'. The fact that it is spelt with a lower case 'k' can't be too political or 'less than neutral' as the palawa language uses no capital letters, though people are free to capitalise if they want; for example the Australian Bureau of Meteorology capitalises it on their weather page as 'Kunanyi/Mt Wellington'.

Is it because I contextualised the speaker as a 'multi-award winning author' and linked to his Wikipedia entry that describes his 17 literary awards? (The multi-award winning author, Richard Flanagan, used the term in his speech)

Is it because I quoted his actual words, as reported on a Tasmanian news and current events website and also played on the radio and TV news stories? Is that too political or less than neutral, even though that is what news programs have already done? In fact the Australian governments national radio service Radio_National has broadcast a recording of his entire speech at the rally.

Personally, I would hesitate to editorialise and alter the direct words spoken by a living person who is notable. (We see our soul being sold for a mess of pottage and there is no end to the shame and the sadness that we must endure in order to have more and more tourists. And you have to ask: why is this government more interested in building a cable car for tourists than it is in building homes for homeless Tasmanians?)

Perhaps the second line, starting 'And you have to ask', is unecessary and could be deleted; but the first line actually uses this literary phrase, which is the point of of my (now defunct and summarily deleted) contribution. The purpose of my contribution was to show that the phrase still has contemporary usage, otherwise we are stuck in quoting long dead literary writers and dusty antique tomes.

Or is it that the quoted words of a person giving a speech is just too political? (We see our soul being sold for a mess of pottage and there is no end to the shame and the sadness that we must endure in order to have more and more tourists. And you have to ask: why is this government more interested in building a cable car for tourists than it is in building homes for homeless Tasmanians?)

Looking at the Mess of pottage article I am starting to see too political and less than neutral bits. There is a direct quote from Karl Marx's writing; you can't get more political than that! There's also a direct quote from the writings of a 'Hindu nationalist' who is promoting Hindu culture and supremacy, that must be too political and less than neutral as well?

Could you please enlighten me as to which words and which phrases I wrote are too political and 'less than neutral', I would appreciate your reasoning.

Cheers,

123.3.237.96 (talk) 22:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@123.3.237.96: Thank you for your long message. The edit you originally proposed to mess of pottage was drafted in a way that focused on the author of the quote and the political views of that author rather than the meaning of "mess of pottage." The goal of that wikipedia page is to inform users as to the meaning of the phrase, not to catalog every usage of it. The phrase is used in media many thousands of times per year (search Google News if you have any question). The way the quotation was added appeared to be more focused on the underlying political protest, which raised my concerns about the neutrality of the edit; I have not been able to find evidence that Flanagan's usage is particularly famous or well-known. I am still not convinced but I will consider your arguments. I agree that quotes from Marx obviously relate to politics, but the Marx quote appears to be based on his status as a famous author rather than an attempt to promote his politics. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:51, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing United States House of Representatives election in Wyoming, 1988, 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco.

Unfortunately Onel5969 has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Only sent this to ask you to please remove the unreviewed article template when you review a page, please.

To reply, leave a comment on Onel5969's talk page.

Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Our Planet. Theirs Too.

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Our Planet. Theirs Too., a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: establishing a notable observance day is a sufficient claim of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 07:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!
Notability
General notability guideline
Subject-specific guidelines
See also

ACTRIAL:

  • WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

  • Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

  • A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

  • There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

  • Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

  • The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

  • Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
  • The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Ye (album)

What do you mean, "vandalize?" All I did was add a higher-quality image of the cover art. People who read Wikipedia deserve nothing but the best version of any information that can be provided. IP138229240228 (talk) 05:43, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

@IP138229240228: The image you added was edited to contain different text than the actual album cover.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

  • I don't think the image I used was edited. Kanye sent it to me and said it was the real cover art. IP138229240228 (talk) 05:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

  • As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
  • Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: 100 review coin, 250 review coin, 500 review coin, 1000 review certificate.
  • Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
For completing over 50 reviews during the 2018 June Backlog Drive, please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping New Page Patrol and keep up the good work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 19:01, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Winston Peters

The media don’t know about this, but the covert CIA agents indeed infiltrated New Zealand government and ousted Ardern while she is on leave. By the way, are you from New Zealand or you just think unconstructive in your opinion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.136.107.125 (talk) 06:08, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

49ers

I cannot believe what the Raiders are doing to their fan base. Makes the 49ers move seem tame in comparison. The 49ers moving was pure evil, but the Raiders move is dark lord of the Sith pure evil. I am not a Raiders fan at all, and even I feel sorry for those fans. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules
  • New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
  • Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
  • Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.
Editathons
  • Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
The Signpost
  • The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/cable-car-all-for-a-mess-of-pottage-/show_comments
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:49ersBelongInSanFrancisco/Archive_1&oldid=1079135700"