User talk:Hugsyrup/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Hugsyrup! Thank you for your contributions. I am Jebcubed and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Jeb³ _{Talk at me here} 13:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yorkshire Air Museum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Britain Memorial (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

I love you my guy. Kellerneuman (talk) 14:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Florrie Redford at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:06, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Hi there Hugsyrup! I'm Adam - a fairly new editor and I'm not sure if this is the right place to type if I want to chat to you? It's just that I've recently created a couple of pages which you've edited and I've written a message about each

- really want to try and figure out where I went wrong with them but don't know if it's in the right place. The page talk section? Thank you! (Sorry if this is the wrong way to chat on wikipedia! Still learning!) AdamSurrey (talk) 20:44, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Adam, thanks for the message, and apologies if the messages I placed on your talk page when I nominated your articles for deletion sounded a bit unfriendly: they are automated messages and can come across as a bit impersonal.

I'm quite a new editor myself so I'm not really the best person to help you, but the essential problem with both articles you created (as I saw it, and others might disagree as the deletions are still under discussion) was that the subjects were not notable according to Wikipedia's definition. It would be well worth you reading up on Wikipedia's guidelines for notability as well as the policy on what constitutes a reliable source and trying to take that into account when creating future articles. You can also get lots more help by posting at the WP:teahouse. I hope this helps a bit. Hugsyrup (talk) 08:26, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hugsyrup, no worries! Thanks for your help and for your reply. I've written again on the talk page of the Coast to Coast Group. Thank you! AdamAdamSurrey (talk) 10:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Florrie Redford

Hello! Your submission of Florrie Redford at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 14:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, why are you changing the reference formatting? When you have more than one page number from a book, it's cleaner to use Harvard footnotes (see Help:Sfn). Yoninah (talk) 15:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Yoninah - well I thought I was changing it to Harvard footnotes, although I don't have page numbers as I'm using Google Books which, annoyingly, doesn't provide page numbers for this book. I see you've reverted my changes back to how I had it before though, so now I'm not sure what to do with them.Hugsyrup (talk) 15:55, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Here's how I find the page numbers in a Google Book like this: I scroll through the book for the fact I want to mention in the Wikipedia article. Then I do a search on Google Books for the name of the book plus a few words from the page I found the information on. This brings up a URL that includes the page number. If you can't find the right page numbers in the Tate book, it's okay to leave out the page numbers. (By the way, that title is really insulting.) Best, Yoninah (talk) 16:12, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Awesome - thanks for the advice. I won't have time just now, but I'll come back and find the page numbers using that method later. (It is isn't it... kind of a shame on a topic like this) Hugsyrup (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

OK, the article looks much better now! I'm going back to the nomination page to comment on the hook. BTW when you create a page on a Canada topic, you can list it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge. Yoninah (talk) 16:17, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Florrie Redford, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hachette (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Footballer A7s declined

Hi Hugsyrup -- The rubric for A7 reads "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines" so whether or not it meets WP:FOOTY is irrelevant. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 12:44, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey Espresso Addict. No worries, and thanks for taking the time to explain the decline. My thinking was that, given WP:FOOTY, simply playing for a non-professional team shouldn't be considered a 'claim of significance of importance', and the articles contained no other claim, so I still felt A7 could be valid. However, I realise I may have got that wrong here. Hugsyrup (talk) 12:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

The bar for A7 is intentionally set extremely low. Different admins disagree on quite how low, but any credible specific claim is enough to save it from A7. Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance is a useful explanation, and you might also like to read Wikipedia:Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, which covers some of the other criteria that patrollers often get wrong. In this case BLP prod is probably the next step, and then look at the quality of the references that are provided, if any. Happy editing! Espresso Addict (talk) 13:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Re: Nigel Botterill

Hi there Hugsyrup!

I am trying to make changes to Nigel Botterills account and each time I add something you delete it. I would very much appreciate if you stopped as I work at Entrepreneurs Circle and wrote the copy on the website that I am copying over.

Please could I add this back to the page?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conker095 (talk • contribs) 13:00, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Conker095: It doesn't matter that you wrote it - the site you are copying it from (https://entrepreneurscircle.org/) states '© Entrepreneurs Circle Ltd. All rights reserved.' therefore the material is not available with the worldwide copyright-free license that Wikipedia requires. I left a message on your talk page explaining this, but the key page to read if you really want to donate that content to Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.

However, given that you say work for the organisation, you have a clear conflict of interest and indeed fit the description of a WP:PAID editor, in which case by editing without a disclosure you are in breach of Wikipedia's terms of use. And by continually inserting highly promotional content and multiple links to your employer's website, your editing is clearly inappropriate. Please read the policies I have linked to before you make any further edits to pages that you have a conflict of interest with. Hugsyrup (talk) 13:09, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Ahh I wasn't aware of the COI policy, I have looked over these and will not make further changes to the page. Could you please revert it back and remove the deletion message on the page? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conker095 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Conker095: Thanks. I have already removed the copyviolating content, and am waiting for an admin to delete them from the page history. The deletion notice is not related to the potential copyright infringement - that is a question over whether this individual is notable enough to have an encyclopedia article about him. That will be discussed by editors for a week and then a decision will be made. You can participate in the discussion but if you do so you must clearly state that you have a conflict of interest when doing so. I hope this helps. Hugsyrup (talk) 13:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Where will this talk be? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conker095 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nigel Botterill (2nd_nomination) There is a perfectly clear link to it in the deletion notice on the page. Hugsyrup (talk) 13:34, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Florrie Redford

On 7 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Florrie Redford, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Florrie Redford played football with other women during her lunch break at a World War I munitions factory prior to becoming a leading goal scorer for Dick, Kerr Ladies F.C.? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Florrie Redford. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Florrie Redford), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Hugsyrup. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Rollback should never be used to edit war.
If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Anarchyte (talk | work) 14:37, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of United Kingdom BSE outbreak

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article United Kingdom BSE outbreak 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 Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of United Kingdom BSE outbreak

The article United Kingdom BSE outbreak you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:United Kingdom BSE outbreak for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Translation of article about the LitRes company

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_LitRes_company

> Honestly I think the notices at the top of that page do a pretty good job of explaining the issue, and they also include several links to a lot of guidelines that will explain it further, in far more detail than you will get from us here. Have you read all of those pages? If so, and you still do not understand something about why the article was rejected, then feel free to come back with some more specific questions. Hugsyrup 10:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Can you help me please? What particularly should I change in my article, that it won't be declined? Because the notices at the top are a bit general for me.

Hi. I'm sorry, but I feel like you've already been given more than enough advice on your draft. The notices by theroadislong are not too general, it just seems like you're not taking the time to read them, and the guidelines they link to, and apply it to your article. For example, what is unclear or too general about 'additional references meeting these criteria should be added'? Yet the draft still only has one reference, and that appears to be a press release. Show people that you've actually made an effort to action the feedback, and they might be more willing to help. Hug^syrup 14:26, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Black Rifle Coffee Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tempe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:45, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Article Zeeyarah

Dear Hugsyrup,

Disclosure- I am working with Superior Tracks Travel and Tourism IT department, please advise way forward if any further action needed.

@Zee2019: I'm going to take this discussion back to your talk page, as other editors are more likely to see it there. I will reply there - please do the same. Thanks. Hug^syrup 11:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Response to "All my edits got rejected" at the Teahouse

I fully agree with what you wrote here. (The OP had been spamming Wikipedia to promote the use of spam – I would have found it very hard to write a civil answer at all.) But I have a minor niggle. Your response was double indented, suggesting that you were replying to the response above. In fact you were replying to the OP, and should have used a single level of indentation. Maproom (talk) 13:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Maproom: - I had it single-indented to begin with and then it all looked a bit merged with the answer above so I double-indented it but you're absolutely right, that was confusing as well. Thanks for the heads-up, and I'll go change it. Hug^syrup 13:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Zeeyarah for deletion

Hello Dear,

Hope you are doing fine.i am still have three notifications on my article about Zeeyarah. Could you please assist me that how can i remove them. I have also provide you a source link of newspaper in which it was written about zeeyarah. Please help me how i can remove deletion notification from my article. I will be really thankful to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zee2019 (talk • contribs) 09:12, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Zee2019: You should discuss articles notices at the article talk page, not directly here with me. The article deletion notice will be removed from the page if the discussion is closed as 'keep'. Until that time, you cannot and must not remove the deletion notice. Looking at the discussion, it seems highly likely to be closed as delete, so I would suggest there is probably little point worrying too much about the other two notices for now. Hug^syrup 15:50, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse - belated host welcome

Dear Hugsyrup, thank you for volunteering as a host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users get a hold of the ropes here at Wikipedia, and helping experienced users that just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Some links you may find helpful as a Host: Helpful scripts you can install to make Teahouse responding easier, templates to use and, of course, the the question forum itself.

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.

regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:56, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:FileMost Popular Wikipedia Articles of the Week (August 11 to 17, 2019).png

Thanks for uploading File:FileMost Popular Wikipedia Articles of the Week (August 11 to 17, 2019).png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 01:29, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your diligent work at WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bearian: Wow, my first Barnstar! Thank you so much! Hug^syrup 20:50, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

SPI

Thanks for your help with that Zaka Weezy SPI, some good spots on your part! Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:41, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@Yunshui: You're welcome! Thanks for jumping on the SPIs so quickly. Hug^syrup 10:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Zeeyarah

Hi. Re my G4 of Draft:Zeeyarah, it can apply in draft space - it is up to the admin reviewing the nomination to compare to the deleted version and establish whether they are substantially the same (outcome: deletion) or have been sufficiently improved (outcome: keep). Unless you have access to the deleted version I don't think you can establish that? I'll re-apply the tag and let an admin review it. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@Curb Safe Charmer: You’re right - sorry, I didn’t properly read the section of the G4 criteria saying it only couldn’t be applied in Draft space if the page was moved there explicitly for improvement which clearly in this case it was not. My bad! Hug^syrup 20:21, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Check for Copyright Violations

Hello, hope you're doing good.

I created 3 fresh pages today which are Amar Dedić, Emmanuel Michael and Bryan Okoh.

I'll like you to review and check them, to make sure I'm not violating copyrights.

Thanks. Nnadigoodluck (talk) 13:09, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@Nnadigoodluck: - all new pages will be checked, though it may not be by me. Hug^syrup 13:10, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Winged Blades of Godric. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Sandeep Maheshwarii, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

∯WBG^converse 17:24, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for reply: Struggling through doing an accurate and full bodied edit is the ONLY struggle an editor should have.

I was given a Commodore Vic 20 in the 1980’s. You’d write a little program, run it, and when you turned it off, the program was erased. That is how long I’ve worked on computers. Through DOS, through all iterations of Windows and ubiquitous service packs. I have a Microsoft Certification.

I’ve worked on weirdo Joomla, and used html, and of course WordPress.  I can use Google drive open source whatever.

I breathe this stuff.

The Wiki editing platform is just... arcane. There’s a secret club here of “yeah it makes sense” . It does not make sense. It is not intuitive.

Struggling through doing an accurate and full bodied edit is the ONLY struggle an editor should have.

An unfriendly user GUI is just... I don’t understand, other than, again, you’ve got the ‘old timers’ who built this magnificent gift (it truly is a gift to the world, sincerely), yet they have a lot in their eye when it comes to making it easy to add an entry.

WHY?

I love Wiki, and use it every day, btw. I want to help make others help you.

Oh and I’ll add my Cityfolk (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2019 (UTC) .... because THAT makes sense? To WHO?

Cityfolk (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

@Cityfolk:. Hey. You're definitely not wrong - part of the issue is that there's a tension between experienced editors, who can work very quickly and accurately directly in wiki markup, fixing problems, adding references, formatting pages etc - and new editors, who would perhaps rather have a WYSIWYG editor. Attempts have been made to accommodate the latter, and in fact I think there is a 'visual editor' though I don't personally use it, but the difficulty is that the more you try to make it easy for the latter group, the more you potentially make it more difficult for experienced editors to carry on working in the way they are used to. Add to that the fact that the community strongly opposes any changes that lack community consensus, yet it is almost impossible to get 'consensus' for major changes, and Wikipedia is increasingly bogged down and perhaps a bit stuck in the past.

That said... I don't actually have a big problem with the current state of Wikipedia editing. I think people who want to understand how it works can learn pretty quickly (I've only been here a few months, albeit I edited for a bit as an IP address before then), while those who don't want to figure it out can still edit, and by and large someone else will come along and clean up after them.

Honestly the bigger barrier, in my view, isn't the editor - it's the endless policies and how quick people are to land on anyone who does something 'wrong'. It's no wonder it's off-putting to newbies. That's a whole different story though! Hug^syrup 14:09, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

There is no way to reply to you Hugsyrup, sad to say.

There's No “reply” option; all I can do is type here.

I can’t see a link to comment: I’m just lead to your comment. No way to thread.

If 90% of the editors are men, white English speaking men, and they’re comfortable in their position, and self righteous in their “this is the way it is: I can’t learn how to use a GUI like Word”, then they will refuse to surrender.

There is no such thing as consensus: there is only compromise.

The back engine could be this odd-nut “system”, and a GUI could be built over it for regular humans who live ...now.

As I’m sure you’ve evidenced, with all the meetups, WIKI will not easily grow it’s pool of editors’ diversity in gender, or age, or color, significantly, until they kill the dragon. The dragon is a horrible editor interface,

You MUST have a good GUI.

Is there a group of humans that are like minded ? I can’t be alone.

Cityfolk (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC) [again - really????? a tilde in 2019?

I'm sure there are like-minded people that would agree with you, but I'm afraid I'm really not the right person to talk to about it! I've only been here a few months myself, and I try to keep my focus more on editing and answering questions than in pushing the sort of big changes you're thinking of. Wikipedia:Village pump is the best place to discuss these sorts of ideas. Best of luck! Hug^syrup 15:52, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Talk:The Hague Institute for Global Justice

Hey there. I don't mean to impose since you already answered my question at the Teahouse, but I left an edit request in the talk page above and it's been 12 days. No editor seems to be interested in implementing the proposed changes, even though all the work has been done in this draft. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 20:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Davykamanzi: sorry for the delayed reply. I'm about to go on vacation for a week and won't have time to look at this before I go, but if still no one has replied by the time I get back, I promise I'll at least take a look for you. Obviously I can't promise I will implement all of your requests, but I will review it and reply. Hug^syrup 08:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Reestablishing contact

You had messaged me when I wass attempting to edit from another users page (Barbra Gayle). I now have my own space and wish for your input re: my paid editing status. Thanks in advance Timgwilson (talk) 22:10, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Timgwilson: - great, thanks for getting in touch. If you haven't already, you should read WP:PAID and abide by the guidelines in that. The most important is putting a disclosure on your user-page, but there are also guidelines about putting a notice on the talk page of any pages you are paid to edit, and maintaining a list of those pages on your user page. Next, take a look at WP:PAY and be aware of the guidelines there on what you can and can't do. If you have any more questions let me know or ask at the WP:TEAHOUSE, although be aware that I am on holiday from Saturday, for a week, and won't be checking Wikipedia. Hug^syrup 08:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. To summarize. My employer gave me access to her user account.(Barbra Gayle). I used her password to log in. I was in the process of drafting an article for her client (Ryan Hedgecock) in that user space Sandbox. As a result of answers to questions I posted I discovered I was in noncompliance with Wikipedia Policy. I then set up my own user page, Timgwilson, in which I am drafting an Article for the aforementioned client. I have disclosed on both my user talk page and my sandbox talk page, my inherent COI. My questions are:

Should I tell the owner of Barbra Gayle to abandon that account - Fresh Start, etc - so she will not be penalized for my non-compliant efforts?

Should I submit my current Sandbox Article about this client for review? It is not finished but I do not want to waste effort going forward if I am continuing to make non-compliant efforts.

Thank you in advance.

Timgwilson (talk) 15:43, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. In answer to your questions:

It depends a bit on what the Barbra Gayle account will now be used for. Is it also going to be used for paid editing? She doesn't need to move to a new account, but she might get questions in the future about her connection with you. I don't think it is an issue if you are both up-front about it though. If she prefers to create a new account then yes, she can follow the guidelines at WP:CLEANSTART
It's fine to submit a draft that isn't finished, but it's best not to submit it if you think it might fail WP:GNG and WP:RS. Am I right in thinking that we're talking about this page: User:Timgwilson/sandbox? If so, it's not bad, but I don't think it would yet pass an AFC review. The problem is that you have six sources, of which 1 is a Wordpress blog, i.e. not reliable, and the rest are really about the band Lone Justice, not about Hedgecock himself. They don't do much to establish the notability of Hedgecock. The one in which he is interviewed is ok, and would be good to support an article with plenty of other sources, but is not enough on it's own. I don't think this is a hopeless case, but right now I'm not seeing enough that is specifically about Hedgecock, so if I were reviewing this, personally I would decline it.

Hope that isn't too frustrating/disappointing. Hug^syrup 15:56, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Hugsyrup,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion

Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Not English

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

Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help and clarity as to my situation. Additionally I have followed some of your conversations as to the arcane nature of the Wikipedia Universe. I truly feel as if I have fallen down the Rabbit Hole. I would in the future value further communication with you. This is my first effort at 'editing' with Wikipedia. The cost of admission is high and the very nature of the interface and culture creates an atmosphere whereby users (editors) and especially newbies are guaranteed to fuck up. And of course my first attempt was to create a Biography for a living person. And being paid for it. I really am trying to follow the rules. But I don't have months to read and absorb policy and syntax and language. I just jumped in. Alas. Your use of Holiday vs Vacation seems to indicate you're from the UK. Anyway. Have a good one. Hopefully my head won't explode prior to Sept. 22. Timgwilson (talk) 18:19, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Gravesend Rugby Football Club - declined

Hi Hugsyrup

I've received a comment from you that one primary source, a brief mention in a book, and a single newspaper from 1927 aren't really enough to get over the WP:GNG line and therefore the submission was declined.

I've added a further source and carried out some general updates. The draft for Gravesend Rugby Club now has similar references to Maidstone Rugby Club - which appears to have been sufficient in their case.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by M-sullivan2 (talk • contribs) 12:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@M-sullivan2:. Have you re-submitted the draft? It's usually better for a different reviewer to look at a resubmitted draft after it was declined the first time, so I'd prefer to let someone else take a look at the updated article. Hug^syrup 09:12, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

A Teahouse barnstar for you!

	Teahouse Barnstar
	Thank you very much for your high-quality, informative contributions to the Teahouse! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:00, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh hey, thanks ToBeFree, that’s really kind of you. I love helping out at the Teahouse and it’s so nice to feel appreciated. Hug^syrup 19:34, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Bill Lavender and Lavender Ink / Dialogos speedy deletion nominations

After careful review of the notability requirments, I can see your reasoning as far as the Lavender Ink page goes, as it does appear to be simply promotional. I will work on that one and resubmit it later. However, the Bill Lavender page seems to me to meet the requirements for notability and is not meant to be promotional. If there are particular aspects of it that seem promotional, I will be glad to edit. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbk81257 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

@Pbk81257:. That's fine, I don't believe I nominated Bill Lavender for nomination, did I? It seems to be a draft, so you are free to work on that for more or less as long as you like before submitting. Hug^syrup 13:41, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

can see whether it attracts the sort of enduring coverage required

That comment you made on the Teahouse arouses my curiosity. What is the requirement for enduring coverage and how is it determined? Number of reads? Is there a way to register that. Thanks.Oldperson (talk) 17:08, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson: - there’s no one specific requirement and it’s not based on a single metric like number of reads, but the question is whether an event has lasting importance that goes beyond ‘news’. Many fairly insignificant events attract widespread coverage for a day or two, but no one will still be writing about them a year later. Others, conversely, will still be talked about or referenced years later. WP:LASTING is probably the best place to look for Wikipedia’s guidance. Hug^syrup 20:22, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you ver much. So much to learn about WP.Don't know if I will live long enough :}.Oldperson (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello Hugsyrup,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 816 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

Tools

It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.

Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.

Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Hugsyrup

Thank you for creating Sydney Jary.

User:Doomsdayer520, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for this new article. Note that it is currently an "Orphan" meaning that no other Wikipedia articles link TO it. This makes the article tough to find for interested readers. See WP:DE-ORPHAN for pointers.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:18, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Governance.com

Please reject my resubmission of this page. Upon clicking submission none of the updates did not Publish. Newbie error. CreativeHelp (talk) 20:41, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Scope creep. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Besnik Sulaj, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

scope_creep^Talk 13:56, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

HELP!!!!

You just replied to my query at the teahouse,but i don't know how to talk back. SarthakKas1 (talk) 16:04, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@SarthakKas1: You can post directly under my message at the Teahouse - just use : symbols to indent your comment so it is clearly a response to mine, as I have here (and when you reply, use ::, and then the next reply uses :::, and so on). I watch that page and will respond to any messages aimed at me even if you don't tag me in them. Hug^syrup 16:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Ovi Nedelcu

Hi Hugsyrup: I made your suggested changes to Author Illustrator, Filmmaker page "Ovi Nedelcu". Thank you for your input and help on that. Can you please review again and let me know what you think.ThanksArad0211 (talk) 05:23, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@Arad0211: You can resubmit it and another user will review it. However it looks as if you have resubmitted it and had it declined several times since I reviewed it, so may I suggest that this page probably simply isn’t suitable for a Wikipedia article at this time, and you stop repeatedly resubmitting it. Hug^syrup 06:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hugsyrup: Thanks. yes I resubmitted it upon request from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CaptainEek , because after he declined it for a few minor references, I corrected it and then he told me that he was not an expert on notable authors or filmmakers and that he was more focused on science and history. So I resubmitted it yours and his suggested changes. I think its in a good spot. If you still see an issue, please let me know. Thanks. Arad0211 (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Hugsyrup: to clarify the re-submission of Ovi Nedelcu, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CaptainEek suggested I let another editor approve it because he was not an expert on Authors and Filmmakers notability. you can read our exchange on his talk page if you like. ThanksArad0211 (talk) 21:17, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Xecced Ventures

Journalist Daniel Mpala of the respected publication VentureBurn clearly interviewed and researched the company! This is appears to be racist...

Yes. I didn't remove that source, so I am not sure what your point is? Hug^syrup 14:09, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contestation

Hi Hugsyrup, Thanks for reviewing the article on Userbenchmark. Unfortunately it was marked for speedy deletion on the grounds that it's not worthy of an encyclopedia entry. I would not agree as I use this site all the time and it is referenced in the Guardian multiple times and Toms Hardware online magazine as a PC owners resource, with the later stating that it reaches 10 million people every month. I did appeal the speedy deletion, but haven't heard back. Do you have any advice about next steps? Much appreciated :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiagress (talk • contribs)

@Tiagress: I believe I marked it for deletion because it did not 'credibly demonstrate the importance or significance of the subject'. Unfortunately, Wikipedia's standards for inclusion are not based on how much you use the site, or even whether it is mentioned in magazines, but whether it has received substantial coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. Essentially, the article as it stood did nothing to suggest why Userbenchmark is significant enough to have an encyclopedia article, and contained no sources to demonstrate that other people think it is significant. If you believe you can solve these problems, I would suggest you recreate the page - not directly in mainspace as it will likely just be deleted again, but as a draft by following the instructions at WP:AFC. You can then work on it and submit it for review by an experienced editor, which will reduce the chances of it being deleted again. Note, however, that it will only be accepted if you can find sufficient sources to demonstrate its notability. Good luck. Hug^syrup 09:54, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to reply! I will look at creating a draft as suggested. Kind regards.

COI

That is incorrect. My first edit was of your National Front entry, which was entirely National Front propaganda. Your editors rejected every single correction, all of which was to correct propaganda of the National Front. I years later made corrections to your entry under my name. I do not know who posted it but it had errors. You rejected those. Finally I made corrections to your Der Stűrmer entry and the Nazi line that their newspaper was a serious paper of record. Again you reject that correction. Someone else pointed out a long line of pro-Nazi propaganda on Wikipedia including these comments

The English Wikipedia pages are far more sympathetic towards the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS than the German ones. Of the mainstream websites, Wikipedia and Amazon are the worst distributors of pro-Nazi perspectives and the Wehrmacht myth. — Jens Westemeier, military historian

Yes, this is one of those myths about Nazi Germany at war that simply won't lie down and die, no matter how many stakes are driven through its heart. The nature of Wikipedia is a large part of the problem, because "enthusiasts" are the ones who tend to spend the most time writing and editing. — S.P. MacKenzie, military historian

So Wikipedia regularly publishes Nazi and Fascist propaganda. It is not at all irregular. And you regularly also, according to the following entry reject corrections by international experts on the holocaust and World War II.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2018-04-26/Op-ed?fbclid=IwAR2QrO-YWKs1N_wunEuCBpMPzUqnVEW0cNa9dBb-SUcL2fvM_CEkZllC9oo#Reaching_out_to_outside_experts

Nice to try to turn it around and argue I have a conflict of interest. I might if you count having most of my family killed by the Nazis. Do you consider victims of the Nazis to all have a conflict of interest? Do you think I am not civil enough with Nazis? I am supposed to assume you are acting in good faith when experts try to remove obvious propaganda and you refuse to change or delete it and pretend to have a site that provides objective information. I long for the days of credible, objective encyclopedias published by knowledgeable scholarly and objective publishers.

Cathy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschnei (talk • contribs) 19:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

@Cschnei: No, the conflict of interest issue relates to you editing an article that you state is about you. I’ll have to take your word for it that you are that person, though I find it a little shocking that a professor chooses to speak to people the way you’ve spoken to people on here. Hug^syrup 19:06, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Actually you never rejected a single edit I made on my own entry. They were simply factual corrects and were accepted!!!!!!

The only fights I have had with Wikipedia is their entries on Fascists and Nazis. Those are the only edits you reject. So the argument about my own entry is a red herring. I did not complain once about that and you did not reject my edits which again were factual and I actually might know the facts of my life. Horrors! Why would you even bring up factual corrections that you accepted on the entry you posted under my name? That is a clear evidence of guilty conscience!! Ha!

Now lets get back to the real issue not the red herring. Why do you refuse to delete or correct Fascist and Nazi propaganda. That is actual Fascist (about Fascist governments and parties, like Accion Francais) and actual Nazi government and their supposedly irreproachable party newspaper? Why is Wikipedia acting as a transmission and communication site for Nazi and Fascist propaganda? Why do you reject corrections from experts?

Cathy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschnei (talk • contribs) 19:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

You have now filed a complaint against me that because my family was killed by Nazis I have a conflict of interest in removing Nazi propaganda? Unbelievable!!!!!! And here is my first conflict with Wikipedia. You see, about Fascism. Wikipedia is the main organ of propaganda now of the fascists and Nazis. I am a scholar not a propagandist so that is why my entries are rejected as conflict of interest?????

Mon, Jan 18, 2016, 4:23 PM to info-en

Your entry on the National Front in France (a party formed by the remnants of the Waffen SS and VIchy) is full of misinformation and propaganda. It skips over the role of the fascist organizations that formed it (and says they were French monarchists!!!) and says it won the last regional elections, when it does not command a single region. I spent a day fixing that article. I am an expert on France, wrote a celebrated book on the top and teach at American University. I gave you an entry and you insist on keeping an entry that was clearly written by a partisan of the National Front!!! It is incredible what you have in that entry!!!! It is not the leading party in France, it did not almost win the 2002 election, it lost 80 to 20 percent, it is not kept out by the French election system but by the willingness of almost every party in France to keep it out. And Wikipedia keeps that entry and rejects mine? Really. I will warn all my students not to ever use Wikipedia and use that example. And I actually donated to your site once. Would you do the same for Nazi entries?

Cathy Lisa Schneider

SO NOW WHY ARE YOU CREATING A BIG LIE AND CLAIMING THAT my complaint is about my own entry, which I never complained about. Is there no body that wikipedia answers to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschnei (talk • contribs) 19:23, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

@Cschnei: I am, to be blunt, largely uninterested in your ‘complaint’ since I do not edit, and never have edited, articles related to Naziism or fascism. I placed a notification on your talk page warning you about Wikipedia policies related to editing an article with which you have a conflict of interest. That is all. Arguing with me about France, the National Front, and whatever else you are concerned about is really entirely pointless as those issues have nothing to do with me. And I’ll say again what I said at the Teahouse - you will get a much better response from people if you can be a little calmer and more polite. Hug^syrup 19:57, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Is my being Jewish the reason I am being banned under conflict of interest?

Because I care that holocaust denial and Nazi propaganda is being spread through Wikipedia, I am being banned as having a conflict of interest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschnei (talk • contribs) 19:59, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

No. You are not being banned. And our rules on conflict of interest are well-established and apply to everyone - see WP:COI. Once again, the conflict of interest relates to you editing this page Cathy Schneider which appears to be about you. It has nothing to do with any other articles, and therefore you being Jewish is obviously not a factor. Hug^syrup 20:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Please spare me few minutes of your time

Hey @Hugsyrup: , i was looking for reviewers who are very active and i happened to come across you , i'm preparing for a journey and i have a feeling i might not be active on wikipedia for a while ,so can you please review this draft for me Draft:Nutty_o ,i want to make sure if its declined ,i will be active to correct whatever reason that may have caused it to be declined,thanks a lot.Selena Moreland (talk) 11:58, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Redirecting Results of the 2019 United Kingdom general election

I saw that you've set up a redirect on the results page I created and wanted to say thanks. I thought I'd checked the page history for when the 2017 page was created and got it into my head that it was about this point in the election cycle but I'd clearly forgotten the actual date of the 2017 election and it wasn't actually created until afterwards. Do you know if it is possible to automatically undo the redirect at say 10pm on the 12th December when the polls close? If not I'll do it manually.

Kind regards Mindi Crayon (talk) 12:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

As far as I’m aware it’s not possible, so you would have to do it manually although it’s quite likely someone else will if you don’t, so I wouldn’t worry too much. Hug^syrup 16:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Just as a FYI

Hey Hugsyrup, I saw that you had recently reported Noormohammed satya as a possible Cuty Pie Sweetu sock, so I thought you might be interested in the SPI report I just posted, on a range of IPs that are very obvious CPS socks – it looks like Noormohammed satya has been creating articles on their behalf, and that's probably what was going on with the article you noticed as well. I'm assuming good faith from NS, at least for now... Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:56, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

@Bonadea: thanks for the heads-up. I’ve seen some fairly fishy behaviour from NS in the past as well, and reported it, but both times the evidence hasn’t been deemed quite sufficient. Really appreciate you letting me know about your report. Hug^syrup 18:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Looks like your spider senses were right! I'm no fan of grave dancing, and in this case I did retain my assumption of good faith (in many cases I don't, but I've been trying to be more charitable recently) so I'm a little sad that they did turn out to be a sockpuppet, but it is good to know that there are people around who pick up on signs of abuse. I do consider unpaid editing abuse of the encyclopedia. --bonadea contributions talk 14:32, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	I really appreciate your help at the Teahouse. I understand why the message was left at my talk page but the coldness of it really raised my hackles. I'm going to log off and play some games for a while, but I really appreciate the advice you have given me (and digging out that backlogs page for me as well) and will use it going forward. LampGenie01 (talk) 15:46, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks LampGenie01! I don't blame you for being a bit put out - sadly there are a handful of editors here who appear to be too busy and important to take the time to be courteous when dealing with what they see as a 'problem'. I've had the exact same experience myself, and sometimes just taking a bit of time away is a good idea. But don't let it put you off for good! Hug^syrup 15:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks to your courteous reply, I fully intend on continuing to edit. Don't ever lose that kind and helpful nature. It's more beneficial to the encyclopedia than any amount of knowledge on rules and policies. LampGenie01 (talk) 15:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)