This is an archive of past discussions with User:Paul W. 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.
Unfortunately, most of the sources I have for this article are physical articles I have, that I have not found online. Is there any way to provide them as verification for the information?
Thank you for your help.2603:6080:4540:99:AC61:F9E7:75E3:D2F9 (talk) 02:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Wikipedia does not insist upon online sources; offline sources are perfectly acceptable - see WP:OFFLINE; providing a scan or an excerpt from the offline source can help respond to a challenge (I have seen content temporarily shared, as PDFs for example, so that editors can collaborate and compile a full citation). We assume good faith (Wikipedia:Assume good faith) on the part of contributing editors. Biographies of living people (BLPs) require most significant assertions to be supported by reliable independent sources, so if you have them, then all is good. In the context of the draft Becker article, it might be wise to review sources closely associated with the subject (not independent, so unreliable), and ensure that key statements are reliably supported. Paul W (talk) 12:20, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Request on 14:35:00, 28 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Twilson088
I wonder if you’d have a look at Draft:Barry N. Haack. I’ve added numerous references that should support the description of his career. Most of my Wikipedia articles have been related to eighteenth-century people and events, but Haack is the third living person I’ve done, all emeritus professors of distinction in my field. The other two went through smoothly, but this one is giving me fits. Thanks so much. Twilson088 (talk) 14:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Tom (Thomas D. Wilson)
No worries, Tom. Definitely good to collaborate and develop the necessary improvements. If I can help on any other contributions, let me know. Paul W (talk) 18:01, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Review of the Draft: Limoblaze recently declined by you
Hello @Paul W: you made some comments about my article DRAFT:Limoblaze which was recently declined by you. I have simply rewritten the article to follow the Wikipedia / encyclopedia form of writing following the guidelines to the best of my understanding. The article is not meaning to propagate any form of religious activities and so I have properly adjusted the article. I kindly request a second look at it. Thanks and regards
MasterOliverTwist (talk) 12:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, @MasterOliverTwist:. I have made a range of further edits and added a comment on the Draft article trying to explain in more detail why it cannot currently be published - basically, it fails to establish notability via significant coverage in reliable independent sources (WP:RS; the TV interviews are not reliable - see also discussion at WP:interviews). Biographies of Living People require good levels of citation in reliable sources, and some claims are not so supported. Paul W (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Paul W: I've gone through the edits and comments added in good faith. I see the guideline pointed and I will look to see that the adequate and necessary notable sources are added following the coverage in reliable independent sources (WP:RS; and further evaluating discussion at WP:interviews) to properly put the DRAFT:Limoblaze in order while likewise adding evidence of chart success, gold records, major tours or album releases by major labels. Thanks and regards MasterOliverTwist (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Daryl Goodrich | Added more references
Dear Paul, thank you for your helpful feedback. I've added a bunch of citations to the /awards/ section and throughout the article as recommended. I was hoping you could take another look at it? Kind Regards, NCwordsmith (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Article now approved. Could still do with some references for Goodrich's early career. With BLPs it's good to have at least one ref for every paragraph. Paul W (talk) 07:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello Paul W:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1900 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Crewe Alexandra F.C. you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 05:40, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:McLaughlin and Harvey and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:McLaughlin and Harvey, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Paul W!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 10:44, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Crewe Alexandra F.C. you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Crewe Alexandra F.C. for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber (talk) 02:21, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chris troutman was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Mostly the sources cited are ok to establish facts. I don't see enough here for a case for general notability. I don't think it advisable to use citations from Padmore while also admitting that the subject collaborates with the Institute's founders. Having key documents in the hand of an uninvolved third party looks more like scholasticism and less like obvious promotional work.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Richard Small (lawyer) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Richard Small (lawyer), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Thank you for the balanced review of my article (Draft:Umma Getso). I am a beginner in this space and would appreciate your guidance to upscale my writing and editing skills. Could you please re-write the draft to standard for me? Looking forward to hearing from you LeadinGuides (talk) 09:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
On 3 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Crewe Alexandra F.C., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Crewe Alexandra finished last in the Football League eight times between 1894 and 1982, more than any other league club? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Crewe Alexandra F.C.. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Crewe Alexandra F.C.), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis-Pierre Comeau until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Hello, I found you on a list of AfC reviewers. Can you please look at my draft article Draft:Volodymyr_Usov and tell if it's written correct. Also see it's included into a category of the articles for submission without a date. It's okay or should I resubmit it somehow? All the best --Raketaman (talk) 08:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Raketaman. I have made a few edits, but can only review the reference sources written in English. On the face of it, the subject appears notable. I tried the AfC submission edit advised in the template, which appears to have fixed the date issue. Paul W (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for reverting my edit on Construction News. I am puzzled by why I undid the previous editor. I think I must have thought they had removed the extra information rather than adding it, although why I would have thought that is a bit perplexing! Anyway, appreciate you catching my mistake and fixing it - thanks. QuiteUnusual (talk) 08:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Good evening,
I have made some changes to the article, to correct according to your instructions.
You said that "the sources may need to be verified by an Italian-speaking editor to check reliability and independence".
For example:
1) "Campus Elisabetta" in SIUSA - Sistema Unificato per le soprintendenze archivistiche" is a government site
2) "La memoria è un diritto umano. Il Centro di documentazione Elisabetta Campus." di Andrea Maori su Nuova Agenzia Radicale 14 Novembre 2015" is a
Agenzia Radicale, con Quaderni Radicali (la rivista politica nata nel 1977 sull'onda del movimento per i diritti civili), è parte di un network informativo, Radical approach nonviolence in media, che non ha mai avuto e non ha alle spalle finanziamenti statali (come giornali e radio di partito), né forti gruppi editoriali, con quotidiani e settimanali che, come accade per altre riviste di "cultura" politica, siano pronti a sostenere il suo sforzo di ricerca e di analisi.
Traduction:
Agenzia Radicale, with Quaderni Radicali (the political magazine born in 1977 on the wave of the civil rights movement), is part of an information network, Radical approach nonviolence in media, which has never had and does not have state funding behind it ( such as newspapers and party radios), nor strong editorial groups, with newspapers and weeklies that, as happens with other journals of political "culture", are ready to support his research and analysis effort.
3) Città di Perugia - Turismo e Cultura: San Matteo degli Armeni is the site of the municipality of Perugia
I can have a translation done by a professional agency. For example for SIUSA - Sistema Unificato per le soprintendenze archivistiche or
or whatever you think is most useful
Hi, Enrico Bartoccioni. I have had a fresh look at the article and done some tidying up, adding some wikilinks, etc. The subject does appear notable, so it may be worth resubmitting the article for review. I have worked on human rights figures in the past, and it may be that other editors will help improve it. (By the way, I did my edits today during a Women in Red editathon, intended to help raise the representation of women in the English Wikipedia). Best wishes Paul W (talk) 20:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I'm agree with you. I hope that also other editors will help improve it, for example from United States (Lakota and from Italy). Best wishes Enrico Bartoccioni--Enrico Bartoccioni (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Jeffrey J. McDonnell
Hi Paul. I want to thank you for your copyediting of the article Jeffrey J. McDonnell but wish to bring up a point about COI editing. The editor you cleaned up for was very clearly a COI editor and was adding unsourced information to a well sourced article. For example, the sentence He was Richardson Chair in Watershed Science and then University Distinguished Professor at Oregon State University in the Department of Forest Engineering from 199-2021. He has been Professor and Associate Director at the Global Institute for Water Security was literally just sourced to the webpage for the Global Institute for Water Security. I appreciate some do not wish to get involved with COI editors but in the future, would you mind trying to clean up their mess than just fixing the Wiki-links. I have reverted their promotional-ish edits but would've appreciated it if someone who saw it before me had done so. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
I chanced upon the article after it linked to one in my watchlist. I tried to fix several of the most obvious visual issues, and also had a glance at some of the references, but I didn't have time to explore the integrity of every reference (so, no, I didn't see them first). If I did something wrong, by all means call me out, but on this issue, I think your message was unnecessary. Paul W (talk) 08:09, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Paul W: Adding customer client information, is advertising by its very nature and breaks Wikipedia of Use, it is classic {[WP:PROMO]]. It if genuine criticism, put it in a seperate section but don't a list those clients, please. scope_creepTalk16:11, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for that advice. The client listing wasn't my addition - I just tried to tone it down. I plan to partially reinstate one of the entries, as it was well covered by the BBC. Paul W (talk) 16:16, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
@Paul W: Would it be possible to add the information for the clubs where his involvement was further than that of a singular case, in particular, Leeds and Bury. Thanks.
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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.
Hello Paul W!
I was wondering if you could help me with some edits for Charlotte Valuer page. Staying true to neutrality and objectivity; I do have a conflict of interest which is why I can’t make the edits myself.
Her page doesn’t reflect her impressive career in the financial industry (Former Chair of IOD) as well as fighting for equality for all in the boardroom and wider society. She’s just set up a new charity the Institute for Neurodiversity (https://ioni24.wildapricot.org/). Additionally, the page hasn’t been properly edited since 2018.
Hi Paul W,
Firstly, thank you so much for all the edits. It looks fantastic and like a real wiki page. What's the process for merging it with the stub? What are the next steps and would you be able to do this? Cheers!MIAAccount (talk) 12:36, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
I have cut and pasted the new content into the original Charlotte Valeur article (and blanked the draft article - it's now a redirect to the mainspace article). The expanded article still needs some attention, with quite a few bare URL references remaining (I can't access the paywalled FT articles), and there are some unreliable sources that need to be weeded out. But as the expanded article is in mainspace, it might get more editors' attention. (By the way, a substantial expansion like this makes the article a potential candidate for Wikipedia's Did You Know feature on the main page - see WP:DYK). I will add a note to the article's Talk page too. Paul W (talk) 13:35, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, MIAAccount. I have merged the repeated FT citations, and one of the unreliable sources has also been weeded out by another editor. I think there is still time to nominate this for a DYK, if you wish to. Paul W (talk) 13:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Brillant! How do you nominate it? What's the process for nominating it and am I able to if I have a conflict of interest?MIAAccount (talk) 14:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, MIAAccount, I have just rechecked the DYK eligibility criteria and we have missed the boat. The article was successfully expanded at least five-fold, but it needed to be nominated within seven days of that increase. In due course, if this were to progress to a successful Good Article nomination, there would be another DYK opportunity. For now, but working towards that goal, I would suggest adding an infobox (which I've done) and maybe getting an image of Valeur created/added in the Wikimedia Commons so that it can be used in the article. Paul W (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Oh cheers! could we add into Known for section: Institute of Directors, coining "Board Apprentice", Institute Of Neurodiversity? MIAAccount (talk) 17:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
According to the Template:Infobox person guidance, 'Known for' is used for "A brief description of why the person is notable." I think being the ION founder is enough for now (it reiterates something from the article lead section). IoD is mentioned already in the infobox above. (As you can see from the Template guidance, the basic people infobox can be expanded further to include, for example, education details, etc) Paul W (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Board Apprentice
Hey Paul W, This is all fantastic. Thank you so much. Do you have the capacity to help me with something else? I'd like to develop a page for the organization Charlotte Valuer has founded. It's called board apprentice which is aiming to bridge the inequity in the board room and train up the next generation of business leaders. I'd written up the page and had ago editing it but I'm struggling with the referencing. Would you mind taking a look at my sandbox and telling me what I'm doing wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MIAAccount/sandbox&redirect=no Cheers MIAAccount (talk) 15:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
There is a Wikipedia guide on inline citation (see Wikipedia:inline citation). How you actually go about adding inline citations is also affected by which editing tool you use (see Help:Introduction for an intro). I tend to use the 'source text editor' (adding citations by using templates activated under the 'Cite' link - see how), but others often use the Visual editor (it has a similar function for referencing - see Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1). You will also need to understand reliable sourcing - see WP:RS. For a subject to be notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia, it needs to be referenced through significant coverage in reliable independent published sources with a reputation for accuracy and fact-checking. Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources (an organisation's own website is a primary source, so should only be cited sparingly - if it all). Consistent formatting is also good practice - see the Manual of Style (MoS) for guidance. Paul W (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.
AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.
Hi Tom. I have provided some reasons on the article's Talk page, Talk:Lapizh. The sources are simply not reliable. By the way, if you (or anyone with a financial interest in your work) have contributed to the article, then you (they) will have a Conflict of Interest (see WP:COIEDIT) and should declare it. Paul W (talk) 09:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
On 5 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article William Rees Jeffreys, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that William Rees Jeffreys was a cyclist who became the first secretary of the Road Board, the forerunner of the UK's Department for Transport? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Rees Jeffreys. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, William Rees Jeffreys), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 19 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dingley Dell F.C., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the short-lived English football club Dingley Dell F.C. was named after a fictitious village in The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dingley Dell F.C.. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dingley Dell F.C.), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Paul - just FYI I continue to revise following your helpful critique. I will be adding new sources in the next few weeks.Ciao bill (talk) 17:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Paul - could you take another look at the draft? You acknowledged that Wilder appeared to have "an eminent career," about which I have since found substantiation in several books and other sources.
I have added a few wikilinks (these help to denote his associations with other subjects notable enough to have Wikipedia articles). It would be useful to add an inline citation for Kutner's obituary about him. The infobox honours should be either removed or at least echoed in the main body copy. I'm not sure that the committee honours listed need to include all the other members. Paul W (talk) 10:54, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Re: committee members - all are notable, most were early mentors with whom he developed significant exhibitions and publications throughout his career that can be documented.
Wouldn’t these be aspects of his career that other contributors could expand on?
You rejected this draft on 13th May 2022.
I have mostly offline sources for citations, but I have checked and I have scans of offline coverage in The Guardian, Jazzwise and The Independent from 1989 onwards. Will you accept scans, or can I show them to you?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by PressgirlV (talk • contribs) 22:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
The Guardian may have online versions of the content you mention (worth checking). Even if they aren't, then we assume good faith in you adding them as sources, so long as the authors of the articles, titles and dates, etc, are clearly stated. Please note that, if possible, they need to be substantial coverage of the subject, not just passing mentions. Paul W (talk) 12:48, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks so much Paul, yes I have The Guardian, The Telegraph, and other , all substantial coverage of Bukky , all offline scans and not available online as they were published in late 80s-90s- early 00s, so the early stuff wad before the internet! Good that you will assume good faith, excellent news will add those in now as inline citations. PressgirlV (talk) 16:37, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi Paul, I resubmitted the Wiki with the offline citations as we agreed you would accept them in good faith, but again it has been rejected by someone else now, please can you help? Please can you honour what you said you would do? Thank you 2A00:23C6:1E9F:3001:78BA:7AEF:4EA2:C031 (talk) 16:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I did not undertake to do anything - I merely noted the good faith provision regarding sources that are offline. However, there are still assertions in the article that are unsupported by any reliable citations, and the Discography section has no references at all. As myself, Missvain and others have said, Wikipedia biographies of living people (BLPs - please read WP:BLP about the need for verifiability) need to show significant coverage in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (note: interviews may also be regarded as primary sources so are not reliable, as the subject's statements often cannot be independently corroborated). Paul W (talk) 17:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I have many notable references for Bukky Leo but they are offline ones that do not exist online, among them are references in The Guardian and The Independent Newspaper and Jazzwise magazine. I have scans of these and they all corroborate the info in Bukky Leo's draft Wiki, I can show you the scans?
Bukky Leo is an established and hugely respected jazz and Afrobeat musician and as you can see he has had a long career with very many recordings released. Please consider this and publish this Wiki once and for all. Thank you. PressgirlV (talk) 22:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
The career and recordings still need citations from reliable sources. Without such citations, a biography of a living person cannot be published. Paul W (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
First time submission - what do you think?
Hi Paul,
That's an impressive CV.
I'm a first-timer at submitting an article and was hoping you might be able to review and point out any issues or reasons it may not be published?
I see that the draft has already been rejected by another reviewer. The draft is a biography of a living person, so demands a high standard of referencing, including significant coverage in reliable, independent sources (note, significant means more than just passing mentions). I have done some tinkering with formatting, added wikilinks, moved citations from subheads into body copy, etc, but the article basically needs more inline citations to support various assertions (as a rough rule of thumb, a BLP should have at least one inline citation per paragraph). All significant assertions should be supported by inline citations from reliable sources (WP:RS).
Plotlines for films are normally summarised separately in articles about the films, but I appreciate there may be some overlaps between the films and the subject's personal experiences.
PS In replying in Talk pages, we normally sign off by using four tildes (~) to give a signature. Indenting each stage of a conversation can make it easier to follow threads too. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 16:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Would you consider becoming a New Page Reviewer?
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)
Hi Paul W,
I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join the new page reviewing team, and after reviewing your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; the new page reviewing team needs help from experienced users like yourself.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, most pages are easy to review, and habits are quick to develop). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR. If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message on my talk page or at the reviewer's discussion board.
Hi Paul W. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:
Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguilltalk21:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi Paul W -- Please don't tag articles as unreferenced if they contain a set of external links or a bibliography section. The appropriate tag is More footnotes needed. There are many other referencing tags to be found in Category:Citation and verifiability maintenance templates. With an article like Settala, . the most likely problem is copyright violation, if the source it has been created from isn't public domain, but the source is probably Italian so Earwig won't see it. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 18:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, Espresso Addict. This was my first day with the New Page Review tools, so I am on a learning curve. I did test for copy violation, but - as you say - the Italian translation probably means it wasn't detected. Paul W (talk) 20:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, hadn't realised when I wrote that you were new to this! I'm trying to triage the heap of completely unsourced from this month (in the light of the Village Pump discussion) and it's a bit soul destroying. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 20:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
St Patrick’s sports academy
I am unsure how this forum works, so forgive me for not contacting anyone through talk as I was unaware how to proceed.
The Wikipedia page while it is not a made up story and is a terrible stain on Scottish football, is painting a poor reflection on an academy that has a membership of over 100 kids and is in no way associated with any of the terrible goings on associated to Celtic boys club and it’s coaches.
I assume that there is already a wiki page for Celtic boys club and I see no need to have st Patrick’s academy highlighted in this way, including a direct link on the page to the clubs website.
Please consider removing this page and or the St Patrick’s sports academy name/links from the page.
Thank you and again apologies for not understanding the correct protocol for the discussion. Kizzyb2018 (talk) 21:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Kizzyb2018. Thanks for getting in touch. You appear to be new to Wikipedia and I appreciate it can be daunting to those unfamiliar with how its community works and arrives at consensus (and after nearly 19 years, I continue to learn!). Welcome.
It is a reported fact (BBC, Times) that St Patrick's Sports Academy was previously called Celtic Boys Club. We do not create new pages if individuals or organisations change their names (so, no, there is not a separate page about Celtic Boys Club). Wikipedia guidance urges editors to faithfully reflect the latest reliably sourced information about subjects, including their current names (for example, the article about Scottish cyclist Robert Millar is titled Philippa York, that person's preferred name).
Once a subject has established sufficient notability (evidenced by substantial coverage in reliable independent sources) to justify an article, the Wikipedia community will not remove it.
External links to websites are common across Wikipedia pages, and often enable editors and readers to connect with the website and read, for example, about the club's latest activities, etc. Removing such a link would, I think, actually stop people from getting that updated perspective.
If there are reliable, independent sources (see WP:RS) that describe the current status of the Academy and the latest work of its coaches and players, then I would encourage you to add that information so that it might begin to alter the overall tone of the article. There is guidance to Wikipedians that articles should reflect the balance of coverage of the subject in reliable sources - it is not about blackening anyone's name, nor is it about 'whitewashing' or erasing history. As editors, we are urged to work in good faith and write content that can be verified by reliable source as representing all viewpoints proportionately.
Thank you Paul, I complete understand, I recently joined the academy and have been looking at ways of promoting the academy, I cannot do this due to the content that is seen via a simple web search. I completely understand. Can I ask why there is no independent page for the old Celtic boys club is it a legal change that was recognised in court? If this is answered within the wiki I apologise. As you suggest if the committee add to the page do we need prior approval of the material that will be added? Thanks again for your help. Kizzyb2018 (talk) 09:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi Kizzyb2018. Wikipedia requires that information is capable of verification, usually by reference to publicly available sources that are independent of the subject. In this case, the renaming has been reported by the BBC and The Times, so the article was edited to reflect that change (as I said, we don't start new articles simply because someone or something changed its name).
As someone with no conflict of interest (see WP:COI), I have made some additions to the page based on information on the St P website; as this is associated with the subject (ie: not independent), we should only use it sparingly. Anyone associated with the St P club would have a COI, so you/colleagues should not edit the page direct, but you can make suggestions via the article's Talk page. Other editors might then take action as they see fit. From a PR perspective, you/colleagues might seek to get local newspapers to report recent developments at the club and its efforts to distance itself from its past; any resulting journalistic reports could then be cited to support appropriately positive updates to the St P club article.
As someone who has had both PR/comms and child welfare roles with sports clubs, I can understand your position (I am also a supporter of Crewe Alexandra - the first club implicated in the recent United Kingdom football sexual abuse scandal; support does not count as a COI, so I could continue to edit, but spent a lot of time deleting vandalism and ensuring accurate sourcing). Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 13:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.
Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]
In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).
While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).
Backlog drive
A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
TIP – New school articles
Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
Misc
There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 11137 articles, as of 06:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC), according to DatBot
There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
It could have been me, or perhaps a bug in the Page Curation toolset. I see previous NPP comment about using Twinkle for AfD instead of Page Curation. I think I will do that in future. Paul W (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear Paul, The article tilted *Jeriq* met every criterion required, kindly help to bring it back.
Hello Paul, I'm Fabregado who has been a registered member of Wikipedia since 2015. I have been trying to create an article on Jeriq for over a year and it has been subjected to constant deletion.
Jeriq meets all the requirements, with all the needed citations and references.
Kindly help me to point out those things wrong with the article.
Hi Fabregado. I saw the page as a New Page Patrol Reviewer. While Jeriq may be notable, this will, as you will know, need to be evidenced by more than passing mentions - it requires substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources (particularly as this is a BLP); see also WP:MUSICBIO. It also needs to be written in a more encyclopedic tone.
"just like other Igbo rappers from the tribe such as Phyno, Tidinz, Zoro and Lucy Q." - unsourced (and is this relevant to Jeriq?)
Reference 3 says nothing
citation needed for being unable to return to Nkpor
Life and music career section: basically needs to be more encyclopedic and less like a hip hop music magazine. I have suggested some example changes in the first para.
"Dremo, the last project titled “E be tins” featuring Mayorkun, was released in late 2021." - how is relevant to Jeriq? If it is, it needs refererences.
I think the final para gives more information about the album (?). This needs to be clearer. Does the reference refer to just one bit of this para or the whole of it? (if the latter, put the reference at the end of the para). Does the final statement ("12 million total album streaks" - whatever they are) relate to sales/downloads? If so, provide a reliable source if you can.
I am not particularly knowledgeable about music, but Wikipedia articles need to convey facts to readers like me so that I/we can understand if/how Jeriq is notable. Best wishes Paul W (talk) 09:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Fabregado, I have attempted to create a credible Wikipedia article about Jeriq on the draftspace page. It is, I think, written in a more encyclopedic tone, adopts a chronological approach to the subject's life (this is a biography of a living person), and draws on the sources you previously provided. However, I cannot vouch for the reliability of the sources (see WP:RS), so have taken them in good faith. Any additional reliable sources (seek significant coverage in mainstream newspapers, magazines, etc; but avoid blogs, fansites, etc) will increase the chances of this article being accepted, but it may take some time. Also, it may be that Jeriq is not yet notable enough yet (see WP:TOOSOON), but could become sufficiently notable as his career progresses. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 12:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
NPP drive awards
The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
This award is given to Paul W for 158 reviews in the July NPP backlog reduction drive. Your contributions played a part in the 9895 reviews that took place during the drive. Thank you for your contributions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 08:24, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022
New Page Review queue August 2022
Hello Paul W,
Backlog status
After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.
Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.
Coordination
MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.
Open letter to the WMF
The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.
TIP - Reviewing by subject
Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.
New reviewers
The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.
If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Star Mississippi was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nicosia Mall and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
On 28 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tony Hudgell, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after suffering life-changing injuries as a baby, five-year-old Tony Hudgell raised £1.7 million for a London children's hospital, and inspired English law changes on child abuse? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tony Hudgell. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tony Hudgell), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 2 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Georgina Kennedy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 2022 Commonwealth Games women's squash gold medallist Georgina Kennedy was once a promising runner, ranked number one in England at the 1500 metres, before focusing on squash? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Georgina Kennedy. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Georgina Kennedy), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB03:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cambois, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fort William.
Hello and welcome to our latest newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Drive: Of the 22 editors who signed up for our July Backlog Elimination Drive, 18 copy-edited, between them, 116 articles. Barnstars awarded are noted here.
Blitz: Participants in our August Copy Editing Blitz copy-edited 51,074 words in 17 articles. Of the 15 editors who signed up, 11 claimed at least one copy-edit. Barnstars awarded are noted here.
Blitz: Our October Copy Editing Blitz begins on 16 October at 00:01 (UTC) and will end on 22 October at 23:59 (UTC). Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 19:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 303 requests for copy edit – including withdrawn and declined ones – since 1 January. At the time of writing, there are 77 requests awaiting attention and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 1,759. We always need more active, skilled copyeditors – particularly for requests – so please get involved if you can.
Election news: In our mid-year election, serving coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tenryuu were returned for another term, and were joined by new coordinator Zippybonzo. No lead coordinator was elected for this half-year. Jonesey95, a long-serving coordinator and lead, was elected as coordinator emeritus; we thank them for their service. Thank you to everyone who took part. Our next election of coordinators takes place throughout December. If you'd like to help out at the GOCE, please consider nominating yourself or other suitable editors (with their permission, of course!). It's your Guild, after all!
Thanks. I had a similar frustration - I didn't feel that social clubs quite fitted (too many working mens' clubs and similar ventures got lumped into it). Paul W (talk) 12:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Grace Barraza-Vega, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Durango, Mexico.
Hello and welcome to our latest newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since October. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Blitz: Our October Copy Editing Blitz focused on July and August 2022 request months; and articles tagged for c/e in December 2021 and January 2022. Seventeen of those who signed up claimed at least one copy-edit, and between them copy-edited forty-six articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: In the November Backlog Elimination Drive, thirty editors signed up, twenty-two of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Both target months—December 2021 and January 2022—were cleared, and February was added to the target months. Sixteen requests were copy-edited and 239 articles were removed from the backlog. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Our seven-day-long December 2022 Copy Editing Blitz begins on 17 December at 00:01 (UTC)*. It will focus on articles tagged for copy-edit in February 2022, and pending requests from September and October. Barnstars awarded will be available here.
Progress report: As of 22:40, 8 December 2022, GOCE copyeditors have processed 357 requests since 1 January, there were seventy-four requests outstanding and the backlog stands at 1,791 articles. We always need skilled copy-editors; please help out if you can.
Election news: Nomination of candidates for the GOCE's Election of Coordinators for the first half of 2023 is open and continues until 23:59 on 15 December. Voting begins at 00:01 on 16 December and closes at 23:59 on 31 December. All editors in good standing (not under ArbCom or community sanctions) are eligible and self-nominations are welcomed. Coordinators serve a six-month term that ends at 23:59 on June 30. If you've thought about helping out at the Guild, please nominate yourself or any editor you consider suitable—with their permission, of course!. It's your Guild and it doesn't coordinate itself.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers and best seasonal wishes from your GOCE coordinators, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Tenryuu, and Zippybonzo.
*All times and dates on this newsletter are UTC. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Hello! Sorry for bothering you: I've decided to leave you a message, since you originally reviewed and accepted my article when it was still a draft.
Given the recent fixes and updates by me and other users, do you think the page is ready to be "upgraded" to a C rating on the quality scale? Rater suggests so, but before I proceed, I want to get your opinion, too.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pearl Qatar until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Nicosia Mall, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
I just saw the recent improvements you did on the Jack London article. May I suggest you review this recent edit which added a whole bunch of unreferenced awards and honors? (I'm trying to avoid article editing these days, or I'd revert it myself.) We've been through this before with that article -- what awards can be sourced are generally "best member of our little club"-type awards that we generally don't include.
I contemplated putting an 'unreferenced section' notice at the top, but I find that often just gets ignored. Best to delete them lock, stock and barrel and see if some sourced honours eventually get inserted. Paul W (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
If you check the talk page, there was a list of awards that a WP:PAID editor recommended, each with a source... but those sources were generally press releases, and the awards local or specific-group-based in nature (alumni awards, club awards, etc.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
I think we should be ruthless on reliability of sources (press releases and club websites, etc are not generally reliable sources) and focus only on significant awards (state, national or international recognition, maybe?). Paul W (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Press releases are WP:SPS -- reliable for non-controversial, non-aggrandizing statements about whoever releases them. So if the Arachnid Club put out a press release declaring that they named Spider-Man their dude of the year, then we can accept as fact that Spider-Man is the Arachnid Club's dude of the year. (We would not accept the same statement in a press release issued by Spider-Man, as that would be aggrandizing.) What they aren't is an indication of WP:DUE; we generally need third-party sources to indicate that a fact is worth including in the article. With awards, you can use a rule of thumb that if we have an article on the award, then the award is significant enough that it should be on the recipients page even if we don't have a third party source mentioning the award being bestowed on the subject; if Terror of Tiny Town won the Oscar for Best All-Little People Musical Western, that should be mentioned in the article even if for some reason it can only be sourced to the Oscar website. But the same does not hold true for the Arachnid Club Dude of the Year, as you can tell by that red link. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:27, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
FGS Global
Hi Paul W, it's nice to meet you. I have opened a discussion at Talk:FGS Global in an effort to update the article following a merger, but seem to have lost the interest of the community. I found that you are a member of WP:LONDON and thought you might be willing to weigh in, or make the updates if you feel they are appropriate. I have not done so myself due to my conflict of interest. Thanks for your time, Charlotte at FGS (talk) 09:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Paul. I wonder if I can borrow your perspective as a Brit? In short, I haven't yet created a new page but have tinkered and edited pages of various business people and politicians over the years. I have an interest in politics and saw this chap giving an interview to TV outside Parliament in London when Boris Johnson resigned. I took a snap and when I got back and Googled him, I saw he didn't have a Wiki page, but a fairly substantial public profile (been on BBC News multiple times, written articles for The Times etc) - so thought I'd take him on as my first page creation project! It transpires he has a fairly similar background to you (former government advisor, now a PR guy!).
I've been struggling however and I think it's potentially partially down to the reviewers looking at it through an American lens (for example, one said that PR Week was not a legitimate and impartial source - but you might have a different perspective? I don't know as I'm not in the industry, but it looks like a legitimate source backed by a renowned publisher).
I've researched the subject fairly extensively, made multiple edits to my draft, but am running out of steam. I feel like given your background you might have either come across this chap or have a definitive view on whether this is worthy of approval, or if I a, best to move onto the next subject (ideally politicians and business leaders in the UK as that's where my interest lies - if you have any ideas, I'm all ears).
Anyway, hope you can help. Be good to get your perspective on this given your background.
Sorry Paul - me again. This is a query about how the AfC function works rather than a request, but does your editing of the draft now mean you wouldn't be able to accept or decline the draft as you're a page patroller? Thanks for bearing with me. JF. JoinFluffy250 (talk) 12:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
In NPP work we are essentially checking that work is suitable and can remain in mainspace. Once an article has been draftified and/or goes to AfC and I have edited it, I think it needs another editor to look at it (I don't want to be seen to be marking my own homework!). Paul W (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Paul. Hope life has been kind since we interacted last month! I logged on today to make a few edits elsewhere on other pages and was surprised to see that the page you kindly helped me with creating still hasn't been looked at. Is that normal? I don't know whether your status has changed and you're able to approve/reject yourself, if you feel so inclined? Perhaps I'm just impatient, but keen to know whether my first page attempt is worth or not. All the best, JF. JoinFluffy250 (talk) 18:56, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
AfC articles can sometimes take several weeks to get a review - editors will often pick one to review at random, rather then reviewing them oldest first. As I said, I don't want to be marking my own homework, so I'd prefer someone else reviewed it. (If you are still looking for business subjects to cover, it might be worth looking at FTSE-listed UK companies to see if their CEOs or chairmen are sufficiently notable - I've contributed to a few biographies of living people (BLPs) in the construction sector over the years..... Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to the March 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December and our Annual Report for 2022. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members, including those who have signed up for our current March Backlog Elimination Drive. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2022 coordinator election, Reidgreg and Tenryuu stepped down as coordinators; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo were returned as coordinators until 1 July. For the second time, no lead coordinator was chosen. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators open on 1 June (UTC).
Drive: 21 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 14 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 170 articles totaling 389,737 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Blitz: Our February Copy Editing Blitz focused on October and November 2022 requests, and the March and April 2022 backlogs. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine claimed at least one copy-edit; and between them, they copy-edited 39,150 words in 22 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.
Progress report: As of 12:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 73 requests since 1 January 2023, all but five of them from 2022, and the backlog stands at 1,872 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Derby County F.C., may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Hello and welcome to the June 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since March. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
Election news: Fancy helping out at the Guild? Nominations for our half-yearly Election of Coordinators are open until 23:59 on 15 June (UTC)*. Starting immediately after, the voting phase will run until 23:59 on 30 June. All Wikipedians in good standing are eligible and self-nominations are welcomed; it's your Guild and it doesn't organize itself!
Blitz: Of the 17 editors who signed up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, nine editors completed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 24 articles totaling 53,393 words. Barnstars awarded are here.
Drive: 51 editors signed up for the month-long May Backlog Elimination Drive, and 31 copy-edited at least one article. 180 articles were copy-edited. Barnstars awarded are posted here.
Blitz:Sign up here for our week-long June Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 11 to 17 June. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 03:09 on 6 June 2023, GOCE copyeditors have processed 91 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 1,887 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybongo.
*All times and dates in this newsletter are in UTC, and may significantly vary from your local time.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.
Hello and welcome to the September 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.
David Thomsen: Prolific Wikipedian and Guild member David Thomsen (Dthomsen8) died in November 2022. He was a regular copy editor who took part in many of our Drives and Blitzes. An obituary was published in the mid-July issue of The Signpost. Tributes can be left on David's talk page.
Election news: In our mid-year Election of Coordinators, Dhtwiki was chosen as lead coordinator, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo continue as assistant coordinators, and Baffle gab1978 stepped down from the role. If you're interested in helping out at the GOCE, please consider nominating yourself for our next election in December; it's your WikiProject and it doesn't organize itself!
June Blitz: Of the 17 editors who signed up for our June Copy Editing Blitz, 12 copy-edited at least one article. 70,035 words comprising 26 articles were copy-edited. Barnstars awarded are here.
July Drive: 34 of the 51 editors who took part in our July Backlog Elimination Drive copy-edited at least one article. They edited 276 articles and 683,633 words between them. Barnstars awarded are here.
August Blitz: In our August Copy Editing Blitz, 13 of the 16 editors who signed up worked on at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 79,608 words comprising 57 articles. Barnstars awarded are available here.
September Drive:Sign up here for our month-long September Backlog Elimination Drive, which is now underway. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.
Progress report: As of 14:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have processed 245 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,066.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023
Backlog update:
At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!
October backlog elimination drive:
A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.
PageTriage code upgrades:
Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.
Notability tip:
Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.
Reviewing tip:
If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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.
