User talk:Atsme/Archive 48

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Atsme. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

→

Mentoring

I have withdrawn as this editor's mentor Atsme 💬 📧 13:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hello Atsme I'm sure we are both aware of my unblock and now I wish to know how I shall be moving forward. I have already done a couple small edits but nothing large because I know I still have a little more to learn. So when will I be able to start NPP school? N1TH Music (talk) 05:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

N1TH Music, before setting your sights on WP:NPPSCHOOL, you need to demonstrate that you can create acceptable articles in draft space that will pass WP:Notability. I highly recommend spending more time as a WP:gnome to gain experience, which will help demonstrate that WP:CIR is not an issue. I also highly recommend that you enroll in the Counter-Vandalism Academy first, and then consider NPPSCHOOL later down the road. Cassiopeia has 2 slots open per Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy/Instructors, and is an excellent teacher. He also teaches at NPPSCHOOL. Synoman Barris is another good choice, and is a graduate of NPP but she is on a wikibreak. Atsme 💬 📧 13:06, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok ok, I guess I'll get to what I wrote in my unblock request, expanding and fixing the issues with the articles I created long ago. N1TH Music (talk) 15:02, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I've got another 2 questions if you've got time.

1. How does one create discussion on whether or not sources are reliable such as Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 318/Google Maps

2. How would I get an article restored?

N1TH Music (talk) 14:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, N1TH Music

First question: Go to WP:RSN, start a new section and ask your question. For example, if you have a question about Google Maps, your section title would be "Question about Google Maps". Next, ask the question. For example, "Would Google Maps be a RS to cite to a geographic location in an article about xxxx? If you are questioning a location on Google Maps because it is inaccurate, then you should provide a RS that substantiates your position.
Second question: For starters, read Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. If after reading that essay, studying the reasons the article was deleted, and are confident the deleted article belongs in WP, then go to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Atsme 💬 📧 17:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thank you Atsme, just the google maps was an example of what I was talking about, I actualyl wish to create a discussion for geoportail.lu and openstreetmap.org the latter is more for clarifying when it can be used rather than questioning reliability because I know it's not very reliable in general. N1TH Music (talk) 17:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@Atsme Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion (new section) states "If your article was deleted through the articles for deletion process, then a request here is not the way to seek restoration." Are you sure I am in the correct place? N1TH Music (talk) 17:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

In the next to last sentence in the first paragraph it states: This means that content deleted after discussion—at articles for deletion, categories for discussion, or miscellany for deletion among other deletion processes—may in some cases be provided to you, but such controversial page deletions will not be overturned through this process but through deletion review instead. What is it you are wanting to do, and what deleted article are you talking about? If you are thinking you can get a deleted article overturned and put back in main space, then you are on a fool's errand. OTH, if you are wanting to get the article draftified or userfied so you can work on it, then you're in the right place. Atsme 💬 📧 17:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

So if it get's draftified, does the history and previous revisions become available for viewing once more? N1TH Music (talk) 18:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it should. Atsme 💬 📧 18:05, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Also Faerschthaff was what I want restored, so then I can restored the redirect and eventually recreate the article better than it was before. If you remember you were tagged into the discussion regarding that article. The deletion discussion itself however I could not participate in because, well I was blocked. I told you before that a redirect made perfect sense and later I found more sources which meant the article can be restored. So that's my grounds for undeletion but I think it states that if articles were deleted in a sort of error I should contact a deleting admin instead. So what do I do? N1TH Music (talk) 18:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Are you talking about the small farm in Contern where they allow visitors? If so, tell me what sources you found that makes you think the location is notable. Atsme 💬 📧 18:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't know where you get "allows visitors" from because that's just a couple of rare events, I've lived in Contern for 2 years and I've never seen one yet but there are a couple.

Anyways on to notability, Faerschthaff passes WP:GEOLAND which states "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low." I haven't got a written source to cite population I'm only relying on one of my neighbours who recognised the residents however I believe he stated the population is 4. Regardless of if he is correct or not, the place is definitely populated and it is also in use commercially. Produce is grown in the area and sold in markets in Contern. So that's populated secured. Now legal recognition is a little harder however I have sources.

There is Geoportail.lu It doesn't say much however the reason I asked about reliable sources earlier today was because I want to prove that is a reliable source but anyway my point is it's official coming from the Luxembougish government. And there's this bulletin from the local communal government. So the place is certainly legally recognised

I know I must also satisfy GNG and for that, I have compiled various search terms, I cannot gather individual links at the moment because my internet is restricted, but nonetheless I can give you the search terms.

In google books searches for "Faerschthaff", "Faercht" "Contern", "Farschthaff" and "Farscht" "Contern" all gave me a few results. I don't remember if there were any in the news section but with regular google there were many results some of which appeared to be reliable enough sources. There are also more search terms like the names of nearby fields and forests and links like this one and others of the sort can help me with that. Expecially since that one (which centres around a different locality, Marxekunpp) is published on Contern.lu, the official commune website. Overall I feel there is just enough here to write a good article backed with reliable sources, that gives significant coverage and there is still slightly more to unearth. N1TH Music (talk) 18:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I can't access your second link, but simply being mentioned in a government document does not imply legal recognition. By that metric a lot of totally mundane places would be notable. Ovinus (talk) 21:26, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ovinus I'm aware of that, sources like Communal and national documents can in almost all cases only be used to prove legal recognition of the place as they are mostly passing mentions. But other sources while less reliable contain actual information just I won't be able to list any until tonight I'm afraid. N1TH Music (talk) 07:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

No, that's not what I mean; passing mentions do not prove legal recognition of a place, at least in the sense of WP:GEOLAND. Government documents make passing reference to all kinds of stuff. Heck, the plot upon which my abode sits might be in a government document somewhere. An example of legal recognition is a city charter. Ovinus (talk) 07:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I see, well then I know it's not really a source but here I don't think the commune of Contern would put a Lieu-dit on their official map outside their town hall if they didn't recognise it as existing. And also [1]https://map.geoportail.lu/addresses/Contern/Faerschthaff?lang=fr, While not super reliable, I believe this mapping company is more reliable than most. I see on their website, offical seals and other things like that, I can edit it or suggest edits, and it's attached to a real website.

Also as for the passing mentions, the name often appeared in a document in an address or in a list of several places like it so I think that is recognising the locality. N1TH Music (talk) 08:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Unpatrolled articles

You're pretty good at sleuthing, have you any idea why this page from November last year has not been patrolled yet? It seems to have been created by an admin but as a BLB it's missing vital elements. I have to be careful what I do or say because last time I did this, I got my admin T-shirt torn to shreds. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kudpung it appears that the original redirect was created by an admin but the person who created the actual page doesn't seem to be an admin. N1TH Music (talk) 13:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Kudz - it appears to be one of those nightmares that was entangled in an older redirect/move (and why I requested a fix for this sort of thing a while back). The original article, Alys Williams was a Welch translation that got double redirected. Tassedethe moved Alys Williams to Alys Williams (singer) w/o leaving a redirect to keep the history. Five years later (2021), Liz moved Alys Williams (singer) to Alys Williams the redirect to The Voice, and deleted Alys Williams (singer). Then along came another editor who removed the redirect, and created a dab to Alys Williams (singer), and Alys Williams (water polo). Atsme 💬 📧 17:10, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Atsme. I see what you mean about nightmare. So effectively, the person who did the last move gets credited with the creation although they never never touched the content, right? Have you any idea why it would have sat so long without being patrolled? I thought there are some reviewers who work from the back of the queue. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

You are welcome, Kudz. I just ran across this, which points to User:Aymatth2/SvG_clean-up/Guidelines involving User:Sander.v.Ginkel, a banned user. According to the sequence of events, it looks like that article was part of a mass deletion. Following is the sequence of events up to 2021:

09:43, December 8, 2021 Polyamorph talk contribs marked Alys Williams as reviewed Tag: PageTriage <–– I'm thinking that patrol was the redirect. This is what I've been begging our techs to fix over at NPP.
18:38, November 11, 2021 Liz talk contribs deleted page Alys Williams (G6: Deleted to make way for move) (thank)
12:31, April 25, 2017 Ymblanter talk contribs deleted page Draft:Alys Williams (Mass deletion of unprocessed SvG drafts and of redirects, see User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up (TW)) (thank)
18:20, January 24, 2017 MusikBot talk contribs moved page Alys Williams to Draft:Alys Williams without leaving a redirect (Moving to the draft space per User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up/Guidelines) (revert)
10:57, September 24, 2016 Tassedethe talk contribs moved page Alys Williams to Alys Williams (singer) without leaving a redirect (to keep history) (revert) (thank)

Hope that helps clear things up. Atsme 💬 📧 20:08, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Perhaps you need to persevere and insist even more on getting this quirk fixed. If I can help I will, but getting older and more infirm by the day :( Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that you are feeling more infirm. You have my best wishes. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Tryp, thank you for inadvertently reminding me. Kudz, my apologies – I was so focused on answering your questions and the NPP issue at hand that I forgot to come back and express my heartfelt concerns about your health. The most I can do is share with you what my 98 yo mother swears by (in an email), if you're interested. What I will say publicly is that she refuses to age. Last month, she was hospitalized for a total of 3-1/2 days with COVID, and I'll sum up her visit by saying the nurses couldn't get her out of there fast enough; Mom is a ball of energy, but at the same time, the day after she was released from the hospital, she was at the bedside of her middle daughter who died the next day. It has been an emotional roller coaster. Mom has a strong will to live – she has bounced back from things that I still have not completely gotten over – and I believe that it's because of us (her 2 living daughters) and her being a professional mother. We were concerned over her sleeping a lot...almost straight through for about 2 weeks, but she claims that sleeping is what helped her to heal. I'm not one to argue about healthy practices with someone who is 98 yo. and is still driving, only needs reading glasses, can hear better than I, has a quick wit, and will have you laughing out loud. Are you getting enough sleep, Kudz? Atsme 💬 📧 23:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Novem Linguae – the above is kinda-sorta along the lines of our brief side discussion @Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers#Repeal 90 day draftify rule?, and I forget where else I've tried to draw attention to it. Surely there must be a way to prevent this confusion, or at least trigger inclusion in the queue when a patrolled redirect is hijacked. Atsme 💬 📧 01:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Looks to me like this redirect has been patrolled for a very long time, then 3 days ago a user flipped it from a redirect to an article, which correctly unpatrols it and adds it to Special:NewPagesFeed. Then today one of our patrollers marked it as reviewed. I guess the confusing part is that Special:NewPagesFeed sorts by creation date, not by unpatrol date? There's a phab ticket about this, phab:T157048. But we should pretty much assume that any article in Special:NewPagesFeed older than 6 months is a redirect that was recently flipped to an article. We can check the article's history tab to confirm this. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Novem. Hopefully, that phab ticket will be answered and will save us some time trying to figure out if it was a patrolled redirect of an article that was improved, or if it was a hijacked redirect for an article created by a UPE or other reason for keeping it under the radar. It will certainly help! Atsme 💬 📧 13:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

N1th

Please suggest to your mentee that they stay stick to editing; comments such as these are not appropriate or helpful. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 20:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Or these. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 20:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Jpgordon - not just your diffs, but I also have a few such as answering questions for me thinking they are being helpful. Equally as troubling is their inability to understand why Faerschthaff fails GNG and N. These are signs of WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT. N1TH Music, I strongly recommend that you focus on what you are supposed to be learning – specifically why Faerschthaff fails GNG and N, and I expect you to provide an acceptable answer, because right now, your future as a WP editor is on shaky ground. You also need to stop giving advice to blocked users on their TP's, even if you have good intentions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and if you want a chance to become an editor, then heed the warnings. Tend to your business, and the things you need to be doing to properly adjust to the WP community. Atsme 💬 📧 21:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok. When I am able to access sources myself again, I will be editing in the mainspace and it will be much easier to stay away from unblock requests also I see there are many concerns over Faerschthaff passing GNG but after looking through everything I could find myself I thought it could just about scrape through. As for WP:N, same thing. I know the original article certainly wasn't good enough but I want it restored to draft space in order to attempt to write the article. If I find enough sources, then we can restore it to mainspace, if not, it will become a redirect for the time being. I don't see the problem with that mindset. I'm not just going "I don't know what you're talking about, Faerschthaff is completely notable" I've stated my point, addressed concerns and stated how I will move forward with a delecate article. N1TH Music (talk) 05:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Jpgordon, I have withdrawn as mentor per this diff. I apologize for what has turned out to be a time sink. At least we tried, but unfortunately they didn't. N1TH Music is on their own. Atsme 💬 📧 12:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear this. I'm not sure what it would take to change the WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT modality. But it's pretty clear that they lack the ability to work in a cooperative environment such as this. I'm not reblocking, as I've not analyzed the situation regarding Faerschthaff and such. I imagine someone else will sooner than later. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for being my mentor

		The Helping Hand Barnstar
		Atsme, as my teacher and mentor from NPP school I wanted to let you know about my recent success. During the recent NPP backlog drive I completed the most reviews (879) and was awarded three barstars for my efforts. I could never have accomplished this without your expect guidance, wisdom, and effort. Thank you for having me as your student, for your time, for your feedback, and your trust. There is still a lot of work to do and I still have a lot to learn; I won't let you down. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 04:56, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge helping to prepare a celebration luncheon for Dr vulper's NPP Backlog Achievement!

I can't begin to express my excitement for you, and for the excellent talents you bring to the project. I am humbled beyond words while at the same time so very proud of you!! My "Bad Hair Day" ballcap no longer fits my head. I had to call the Duke and Duchess, and they immediately began preparing a fabulous luncheon for you! They even hung 2 banners up on the back wall in honor of your accomplishment.

Atsme 💬 📧 11:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP School

Hi, Atsme! It's me again. I've seen the NPP backlog is pretty large and I looked into the NPP pages to see if there was any way I could help. I've worked through WP:NPP, the further reading section, the Page Curation tutorial as best I can on my own. It looked like you had one open NPP School slot and I wondered if you'd be open to taking me on as a student? I would probably have to work somewhat slowly due to real life commitments, but I think I can be fairly consistent. Thanks, Perfect4th (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely! I will ping you from the tutorial. Atsme 💬 📧 17:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

That's what you wanted done, yes?

Cheers! BD2412 T 19:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Atsme 💬 📧 19:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks again for helping me through NPP school. I've enjoyed reviewing much more than I thought I would! Ovinus (talk) 21:27, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm so happy to hear that, Ovinus! It does my heart (and the project) good. I feel fortunate that you chose me because working with you was a cake walk. And look at you now – an excellent reviewer. Keep up the good work!! Atsme 💬 📧 21:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The most fun part has been fixing up borderline articles. And of course there are the occasional stellar articles that come in from newbies, like Tyndall Glacier (Alaska), which are always encouraging. Ovinus (talk) 19:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Wow...verrry nice! Atsme 💬 📧 19:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP School

Hi! I would love to be one of your students.--IndyNotes (talk) 18:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, IndyNotes – I would love to have you, and am certainly willing to give it a go based on your RL credentials, but will say up front that it will not be a cake walk. Are you sure this is something you really want to do? Atsme 💬 📧 19:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

It is! Though I hope and assume that it is okay if I take weekends off or there are several hours between responses. ~ IndyNotes (talk) 19:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely - we have no deadlines on Wikipedia. You can work at a comfortable pace. I will set up a tutorial page and ping you when it's ready. Atsme 💬 📧 19:20, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP Student

Hey Atsme. I'm looking for a teacher at NPP school. It was a pleasure reading User:Atsme/NPP training. I installed some of the scripts recommeneded there. I think Im ready to give a try. AFC has provided me with some knowledge. NPP, however, is a place where more volunteers are needed due to heavy backlog. I would appreciate if you could include me if there is a slot available. DavidEfraim (talk) 07:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, DavidEfraim – thank you for considering NPPSCHOOL and becoming a new reviewer. Unfortunately, I have no available slots at this time but the school chart shows Cassiopeia with 2 open slots. Good luck, and happy editing! Atsme 💬 📧 09:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

The Bots are upon us

I'm not quite sure what this means for WP, but it was inevitable. I have tried to prepare NPP for it, and at this point in time, I'm at a loss as to what more can be done. See Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Dams article, and if you get a chance, familiarize yourselves with Botipedia. Atsme 💬 📧 11:38, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Update: Phase II of DS reform now open for comment

You were either a participant in WP:DS2021 (the Arbitration Committee's Discretionary Sanctions reform process) or requested to be notified about future developments regarding DS reform. The Committee now presents Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions/2021-22_review/Phase_II_consultation, and invites your feedback. Your patience has been appreciated. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol School

Hello, IMO we've came across before at WP:RSN. I've came across WP:NPPSCHOOL and it looks pretty interesting, and you are listed as a trainer. IMO I've decent participation of AfDs, could you tell me more about this program? Thanks kindly, and have a good day:) VickKiang (talk) 01:51, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, VickKiang, I do recall a brief interaction at RSN, and you do indeed have a good record at AfD. In a nutshell, NPPSCHOOL is a tutorial to help users understand the basic principles of New Page Patrol and reviewing new articles on Wikipedia. The school was established to provide a one-on-one tutorial and assistance in the use of our New Pages Feed and curation toolbar. You are welcome to read the basics of my tutorial at User:Atsme/NPP training which begins by reviewing the Wikipedia:NPP tutorial to familiarize yourself with the process and various tools before starting the one on one interaction of my course which includes various exercises and discussions that may include different perspectives to exercise one's critical thinking skills relative to the applicability of PAGs from the perspective of an experienced new page reviewer. Atsme 💬 📧 12:56, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks! I have had a look at the tutorial. VickKiang (talk) 21:35, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

You are quite welcome. Let me know if ever I can be of further help. Atsme 💬 📧 22:20, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! IMHO, I might be interested for the NPP training, but I might not always be convenient because of the time zones. VickKiang (talk) 22:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

That's ok, Vick - you can work at your own pace. I'm on Dutch Caribbean time.

Atsme 💬 📧 23:08, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm thinking of doing the training- do I write it in the page you linked or something like that? Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 23:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, then I will set-up the training page for you, and ping you when it is ready. Everything will take place on that training page. Give me a few minutes, and you'll get the ping. Atsme 💬 📧 23:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

August songs

pics and thoughts on 13 August -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

and on 15 August: "my" concert of the year (so far) is on the Main page, but not pictured, and I don't understand why - pic of wildflowers next to a river, today--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for improving articles in August! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda!! Atsme 💬 📧 01:08, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The last week brought more outstanding concerts and bike tours, - how is your summer? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

+ the church where I heard VOCES8 and more discoveries --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you for what you said in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 September 1 about the viola music lists. Did you see what happened to them? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

You are very welcome. It was an easy peasy – I was simply following PAGs. I did not see what happened to them – explain? Gerda? Atsme 💬 📧 23:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Try to find them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:08, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Missing our chats at NPPS!!!! BTW - have not heard back from my PERM request, but helping out at AFC until I do. Stay well Atsme.

MaxnaCarta (talk) 05:46, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Awww...sweet kitty!! Thank you for the kind words! And CONGRATULATIONS, MaxnaCarta!! I see that PM granted you the NPP user right today!! Oh, and if you get a chance, see what a bit of research turned up on that one AfD that somehow fell through the cracks and missed the KEEP close with the others. Granted, NEXIST & GEOLAND sometimes requires extra work and critical thinking skills, almost at the level of investigative reporting. Now that you are a full-fledged member of the NPP team, you have access to a huge pool of great talent – you will fit right in. You might also want to stay apprised of the goings on @ Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration Committee/Requests for comment/Article creation at scale. Happy patrolling!! Atsme 💬 📧 17:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
@Atsme THANK YOU! I have had a few days off because I was preparing a giant feast for Father’s Day. Dry aged steaks, crispy skin chicken, potatoes, carrots, gravy, lemon tart and a cheeseboard. When I put on a spread, i like to go hard or go…out to eat because there is no point unless its extravagant!! Thank you so much for helping me get probably the most important userbit there is (other than adminship i suppose!). I will treat it with great care. Until I develop experience I may stay away from any gray areas. I also warmly welcome you to monitor my performance and let me know if you spot any errors. Cheers :) MaxnaCarta (talk) 09:59, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
Crispy skin chicken!! OMG!! 🍽 🍗 If the care you put into preparing your meals is any indication of the care you will put into your work, I have no doubt that you will do an excellent job. It was an honor to have worked with someone of your caliber, MaxnaCarta! Please feel free to join the discussions over at WT:NPP/R. Atsme 💬 📧 20:34, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sala Sporturilor (Mioveni)

Hello Atsme. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sala Sporturilor (Mioveni), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. $Salvio$ 11:27, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

NPP school

A bit belated, but I was wondering if you're still taking students. You seem like a great teacher and I'd really appreciate the help. Thanks —VersaceSpace 🌃 20:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, VersaceSpace – your timing is perfect. I will be happy to help. I just graduated a trainee which leaves a spot open, so if you are ready to go, let me know and I will create a tutorial page for you. Atsme 💬 📧 20:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm absolutely ready to start. Thanks again for the help. —VersaceSpace 🌃 20:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thank you so much for training me in NPP School! VickKiang (talk) 21:38, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

You are very welcome, Vick! I love baklava, so thank you! Just an FYI – I am a former advanced open water scuba & NITROX instructor, which basically means I taught my students how not to drown, or drown me in the process. Fits right in with NPP. 🤿 Happy reviewing!! You were an absolute pleasure to work with! ^{It still bothers me to end a sentence with a preposition, unless I'm horse trading.} And remember, I'm here, as are my precious ^{( Buttinsky)} (talk page stalker) Wikifriends,...so if you have questions or simply want a 2nd opinion, bring it on. WT:NPP/R, is another excellent venue for reviewers to collaborate and update. The back and forth actually helps keep us all sharp, and that's a good thing! Atsme 💬 📧 22:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Some patrols

Hi there! Totally optional because I know you're busy with other NPP students, but please if possible could I just left some of my patrols here for you to quickly tell me whether you think they are accurate? If not that is okay! Thanks :)

His Secret Life - approved because it had been covered in several sources. Also, a BEFORE check showed substantial mentions in books. Article was deleted two years ago by another editor, was entirely unsourced at that time and PROD expired.

MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Y The film you wikilinked passes – good job. The only suggestion I have at this time is for you to not review anything that is new in the NPP queue (that article was only 1 day old when you reviewed it, although it had history). We need to allow at least a week for curation. You can either scroll the queue to review older articles, or set the filter to oldest. Happy reviewing!! Atsme 💬 📧 11:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks :) MaxnaCarta (talk) 11:12, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh, one of those pics

Ah, the great penis-war of 2018. Ctrl-f penis at WP:PRESS 18 for an impressive number of hits. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Atsme 💬 📧 22:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC) For tps - with reference to this post. 01:17, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Question on NPP

Hello, Atsme! I'm doing my second NPP review (thanks again for tutoring me!) for Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1986 film), which clearly appears to fail notability (added tags and messaged the creator). IMHO, because it was previously a redirected, it should be restored as so. If you have time, could you comment if you would agree I restore the redirect instead of AfDing? Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 09:24, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Agree to redirect, VickKiang – there is a plausible suggestion on the article TP for it to point to Adaptations of Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde#Film since it is based on that story. Atsme 💬 📧 10:53, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

VickKiang – I reviewed the steps you took – quite impressive, indeed...especially your interaction with the new user. Top shelf for sure. Atsme 💬 📧 11:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The specific adaptation is currently listed under the television section due to being a direct-to-video film. I'm sorry to say that I couldn't find more sources regarding the film when I was making the article, and that I only needed a short sommary that only lists major events in the story. Inkster2 (talk) 11:46, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Inkster2 and welcome to WP. Your efforts are much appreciated. As we all experience over time, WP's expectations for a stand-alone article are quite high. In this particular case, there are so many different adaptions of that same film/plot that redirecting makes perfect sense. It accommodates readers looking for a specific format, or who may not have known so many different adaptations existed. Atsme 💬 📧 12:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Redirects and Deletions

The Demon Queen AfD is getting really long, but you have brought up issues that really need to be addressed at a higher level. Again, Wikipedia has policies/guidelines on preserving edit histories for proper attribution in case someone like Demon Queen becomes more notable in the future, if someone searches for an obscure band name and whether they should be sent to a "create new article" page or redirected to someone associated, etc.

Your arguments at the Demon Queen AfD are based on valid policies/guidelines, but for the umpteenth time, those policies/guidelines CONTRADICT others that have been sitting there for just as long. You're barking up the wrong tree by trying to convince AfD voters of one side because (especially for bands) we've been bombarded just as much by the other side's arguments. Once again, see this and this for arguments in which this contradiction reached absurd levels. Then try to figure out why this useless article is sitting on Wikipedia because of a "no consensus" caused by that very same contradiction. If you want results on Demon Queen or anything else, take it to a higher level. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:38, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

And I have the perfect response relative to the problem we are dealing with, and it is right here: referred to as the hegemony of the asshole consensus.

Gotta love it...but you cannot read that without reading this, too. I'm not sure as to what higher level we can go because right now ArbCom is already focusing on AfD as it relates to mass creation/deletion and behavior. But back to the close, and potential remedies that are within our immediate reach. For example, we are dependent on a single closer to make the determination based on the strength of the arguments. The closing process itself is purely subjective, which explains why we should have at least 3 top shelf closers instead of 1, and I will add that we do have some excellent closers. I even created The Closer's Barnstar as recognition for their good work. I'm doing what I can to teach new NPP reviewers the various perspectives, the ups and downs of PAGs, and to exercise critical thinking and diligence per WP:BEFORE. I also try to use examples to demonstrate the most important points of reviewing, determining N, and how best to make the right choices relative to CSD/PROD/AfD, the latter being a game of hit and miss depending on which admin or closer shows up. We can only do what we can do, and I have reached my max with more waiting for me on the back burner.

Atsme 💬 📧 16:26, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Check out the NPP Petition

As of today, there are 441 signatures. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination/2022 WMF letter Atsme 💬 📧 23:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, and I'm one of them. (But in this crazy world, the petition was accused of being racist.

Facepalm) --Tryptofish (talk) 19:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

What?!! You're joking, right? Atsme 💬 📧 19:49, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Would that I were, but... Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination/2022 WMF letter#Racism / xenophobia. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Just, wow! Such a racist petition. How dare it assume billions now have access to the internet, any number of which may just want to edit on Wikipedia. --ARose Wolf 20:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Social Justice Warriopedia. It's only going to get worse because they are emboldened. I wonder if the WMF can handle the NPP backlog if all the volunteers who signed that petition decide to strike. They do support unions, don't they?

Atsme 💬 📧 21:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

The other day I saw a post at The Website That Dare Not Speak Its Name, in which someone posted a photo showing a young couple walking down the street. An attractive young woman was walking in the other direction, the male of the couple was doing an admiring double-take, and the female of the couple was looking at the male disapprovingly. The young man was labeled "WMF", the woman he was looking at was labeled as grant money, and the young woman in the couple was labeled as "experienced Wikipedia editors". I thought it was excellently on-point. Which is to say that the WMF has a wandering eye, and is probably not to be trusted. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:21, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

NPP school

It's bit belated to start editing, and now I want to start editing and interested to doing NPP training. Thanks - 345LU (talk) 19:41, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, 345LU. Glad you stopped by and have taken an interest in being a NPP. I took a quick look at your edit history, and it appears that you do not meet the basic criteria per the following: Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers. Get some edits under your belt first. Happy editing! Atsme 💬 📧 19:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, so I start editing and get back soon. Thanks - 345LU (talk) 20:38, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

NPP training

May I proceed to part 4? Many thanks!--IndyNotes (talk) 22:09, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes absolutely - I will try to get to it tomorrow. Atsme 💬 📧 22:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Some kind of WP:V and WP:RS school/tutorship/help for a fellow editor

Hello @Atsme ! I've seen you active in NPP school, helping editors to develop both patrolling skills and a sensibility towards Wikipedia values and guidelines. I think that you might be the right person to ask for assistance about how to help both the project and a fellow editor regarding the WP:V and WP:RS issues of a series of edits. Also, I do not have the gift of synthesis. I hope you can forgive me.

Added - TL;DR - Is there a training program such as NPP School (or other similar solutions) that I can suggest to an editor who does not seem to be very familiar with English, to the point of adding questionable sources to articles that then need to be substituted or removed?

During NPP, I came across a new article that had many serious issues. It was the translation of a long and detailed non-English Wikipedia article on history of art. The topic is for sure notable but unfortunately the original article was almost entirely without sources (hundreds of statements and claims, only five citations) and I'm afraid that some parts of it were written as an essay/dissertation.

In adapting the article to English Wikipedia guidelines, the editor who published it added only non-English sources, about fifty. When checked, it turns out that about 50% of them don't support at all what the article says. They are just sources that discuss the topic to which they are associated, but they don't provide a confirmation of the specific statements, failing WP:V.

Also, the English of the translation wasn't particularly good and reliability of sources was really worrisome, so I moved the article to Draft, explaining my decision to the editor in this reply.

... then I realized that adding generic non-English sources to Wikipedia without checking if they support what an article states is a common habit of this editor in other articles as well.

Now, I think I can help checking those non-English sources and substituting them when necessary but I also feel that we need to help this editor improving their ability to assess if sources meet Wikipedia guidelines, because the current approach creates both false sources (less easy to verify by the English community) and more cleaning work for other editors.

Can you suggest a way to help this editor? Are there Wikipedia projects like NPP School that I could suggest to them? Please, note that this editor might not be very familiar with English.

Thank you! ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 20:46, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

You brought up some really good points, LowLevel73. I have been studying what you've presented for the past few hours, and I even commented on Jimbo's UTP. What you are bringing up now stirs memories of my objections over the years to allowing foreign language sources to be cited. I doubt that the majority of our readers speak multiple languages, or they could simply go read their own language WP. I am also of the mind that citing foreign language sources conflicts with Verifiability as the en.WP clearly states: In the English Wikipedia, verifiability means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Presuming "other people" are readers and editors of English, how can they possibly correctly check to see if a foreign source is a RS, much less if the material is included in the context it was intended? I've heard arguments in support of Google translate, but those arguments do not take into consideration the nuances, such as what can be lost in translation, and I say that as the grandchild of Italian immigrants who did not speak English, and as a rancher who speaks ranch Spanish. Socially speaking we have fun with it, but that is far from being on the level of encyclopedic. This is a real problem because it presents a challenge to complying with V, NOR, NPOV, RS and to maintaining the overall quality of en.WP. Has en.WP gotten to the point that we need language experts at NPP, or do we simply shrug it off ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and go with WP:IDGAF? The latter is simply not in my nature, but in an attempt to respond to your question, all I can advise is that without a high level of fluency in English, I cannot see where NPPSCHOOL would be of any help. As for me tutoring, the simplest explanation is that my Italian is limited to a few cuss words. As a kid, I noticed that my mother would sometimes struggle with English because she was raised speaking Italian, and when she'd say something in English it would occasionally be out of context to what she was thinking in Italian. The latter may explain why I'm such a mess

, but more likely why brevity is not my strong point. I sometimes go into great detail when explaining something, but that could date back to when I was getting paid by the word. Annnyway...that's all I have for now – but something might hit me later in the day or week. One thought that popped in my head was perhaps the WMF can invest some money in translating and publishing foreign language RS into English, and less money toward social issues and trying to RGW. We are an encyclopedia not an advocacy, but we might as well spit in one hand and wish in the other and see which hand fills the fastest. Wait – I'm sharing this with Cassiopeia for his input. Atsme 💬 📧 13:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

This is an interesting dilemma. (I also took a look at the discussion at Jimbo talk.) As much as it's very kind to try to figure out the language problem, it seems to me to be contrary to what we should have as content if the cited sources turn out to be completely inappropriate to the content they are intended to support. Consequently, I'm not convinced that this is a situation where it's enough to try to mentor the editor. I'd be inclined to just revert/delete content as per WP:TNT. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Likewise, brevity is not my strength though it was for my Grandfather and Papa who chastised me for using more words to say less, in fact, my Papa could speak to us in grunts, facial expressions and using his eyes and we knew what he meant. He was a man of few words but deep in his knowledge. I digress, being raised only able to speak Hebrew or Italian at home while using English only outside our home was a bit challenging and I still revert to my natural tongues today, especially when I get emotional or angry. But living in the US since age 11 has helped though I still speak with a heavy accent. I do, however agree with Tryp in this instance. If the sources do not support the content they are attributed to then TNT may very well be the only appropriate action. The history will maintain the information and it can be re-added with correct sourcing at any point. --ARose Wolf 19:14, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Atsme, thank you for your answer and thoughts. :-) I was hoping somehow to be able to help that editor, but I understand that unfamiliarity with English can greatly limit how we can support them. This is a pity, because it seems to me that this person is already able to contribute to the project in a positive way.

Regarding your comments on the language issue in general, including the concerns expressed on Jimbo's page, I have given it some thought and here is my opinion, which will focus on the topic of verifiability and specifically on language, procedures, and tools.

Regarding language, I think that non-English sources should be generally accepted in citations, but that their usefulness and function should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis from two different perspectives: the source itself and the totality of all sources used in an article.

In itself, I don't believe that a non-English source should be considered inherently problematic. On the other hand, when all or most of the sources cited in an article are non-English, this scenario creates a serious accessibility problem for most people, because verifiability will not be easy or even possible for all those people who presumably wanted to read an article in English.

Now, if the goal is to facilitate verifiability not only for a smaller percentage of readers but also for the majority of them, the goal can be achieved by providing more English sources, not by limiting the non-English ones. Does it make sense to you?

Assuming the community endorses a new guideline designed to improve verifiability, one way to assess the impact of a language issue of an article might be to imagine it without all non-English sources and decide whether the remaining ones adequately support the verifiability of the most important/controversial/challengeable statements and claims. If they do not and other English sources can be found, then adding them should be a requirement.

I don't think more (or different) NPP procedures are needed to make verifiability easier for reviewers. As usual, they should evaluate sources focusing on quality and depth. If they do not feel confident enough in evaluating citations and sources, they should leave the article to another reviewer.

Another aspect that needs to be addressed is the tools that the community has to handle verifiability issues. I am not just referring to technological tools (although in the New Pages feed some warning about language-related issues might help), but also tools that can be used to warn readers of verifiability problems.

For example, I fear that the documentation of Template:Failed verification may contain a sentence phrased so vaguely that it might work as an exploitable loophole to legitimately remove the warning tag even if it is true that the source does not support what the article states. (OK, this might be a tongue-in cheek comment)

The reason is that even if I find a source that does not confirm something written in the article, I should still not add the failed verification tag if the source "still contains useful information on the topic".

So, I wonder, what's the point of an inline citation if the online world has already associated it with the meaning of "source supports statement", but then 1) it can contain pretty much anything on that topic and 2) I shouldn't even warn the reader about that? ;-P

I'we written too much again, and I'm not even paid to do it! Cheers! ► LowLevel73 ^(talk) 22:07, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

LowLevel73, the wheels are still turning, and again you have made some good points. This has been a stimulating discussion. Ok, you asked, "Now, if the goal is to facilitate verifiability not only for a smaller percentage of readers but also for the majority of them, the goal can be achieved by providing more English sources, not by limiting the non-English ones. Does it make sense to you?" Yes, it is a very good suggestion but not an easy one to apply in practice as I will explain. For my live review exercises, I pre-review the unreviewed articles in the NPP queue, and choose the ones I need according to the experience level of my trainees. That way, I can focus using a customized approach for each trainee in the areas they need tutoring. I am also of the mind that the onus for providing English sources is on the editor who created the article or its translation, and should not be on NPP. After reading some of the input here and at Jimmy's UTP, I am even more convinced that the correct direction is to tag and draftify articles that do not have any English sources, and in the event there is a mix of sources, then simply tag them. My reason for choosing that approach is validated by both policies and guidelines including NOR, V, RS and GNG/N. I will elaborate further for the sake of clarity:

A source is cited because it supports what the author has written, and while it may seem an easy task for a reviewing editor to find a source that supports the material, it is not, especially if it is in a foreign language. Think about finding, in context, a cited 3 sentence paragraph that has been challenged and is cited to a book with no page #, or to a printed magazine article, or a 20 page review article in an online PLOS Journal. What if it is a paraphrased quotation? It is not as simple as citing a book about the topic, rather it has to be a RS that supports, in context, the precise material that has been challenged, or we risk noncompliance with OR and V.

As I stated above, "One thought that popped in my head involves the WMF investing some money and/or resources in translating and publishing foreign language RS into English..." They could actually fund a WP project that does nothing but digitize and translate printed foreign language books/journals/magazines to English. I know it can be done via automation but the caveats include copyrights, availability of the books, and knowing which books should be translated. Perhaps the foreign language WPs could be approached by WMF and asked to provide those lists, or maybe break it down into translations of cited pages in their articles. It is not too big a problem for NPP with foreign language websites because they can be translated on the fly, but if the website is no longer available and we have to dig through Wayback, it becomes a time sink. There is also the issue in the quotebox. Atsme 💬 📧 12:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

@Atsme and LowLevel73: Sorry for the late reply. (1) Sources - sources can be in any languages provided they are independent and reliable. If body text content does not supported by any sources or existing source in the article, the info can be removed from the article. Since this is English Wikipedia, all articles needs to be written in English (it does not matter the spellings are British English or American English). (2) Copyright (copyvio) - You can use Earwig's Copyvio Detector to check if the bodytext of an article violate [[WP:COPYVIO]. Install Earwig Copyvio Detector script. (The "copyvio" will appear on the left panel under "Tools" section on every page in Wikipedia. Hope this help. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 02:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Cassiopeia. The only problem with trusting too much in Earwig is when the article is written in English, but the sources are in another language and/or in a book that is not online for Earwig to match. It introduces another difficult situation. Atsme 💬 📧 00:05, 18 September 2022 (UTC)