User talk:Hilst/Archives/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 < Archive 1    Archive 2   
All Pages:  1 -  2 -  ... (up to 100)


Putlibai dacoit

Thanks for your edit. But this edit appears wrong to me. The correct name of the dacoit is Putlibai, as you can check in several references. Somehow, the page now directs to a person called "Put Libai". There is no such person. Anil1956 (talk) 13:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed. – Hilst [talk] 14:04, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join New pages patrol

Hello Hilst!

  • The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
  • We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
  • Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
  • Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
  • If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

Hi Hilst. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page 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 or ask via the NPP Discord. 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, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
  • Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
  • 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. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:55, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! – Hilst [talk] 16:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request to review the new page SpaceX Starshield

Hey, I'd appreciate if you could review this page: SpaceX Starshield. If you have any advice I'll take note of it. Thank you for your time. CodemWiki (talk) 23:39, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CodemWiki: Sorry, but I can't do that, as it would be unfair to the other editors who have been in the queue for longer. I'm sure another reviewer will get to it soon. – Hilst [talk] 00:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is already a bunch of misinformation going around on Facebook and Reddit about Starshield, because news articles/posts keeps popping about it but there is no wikipedia lede indexable by Google to explain to people what is Starshield. All that because the vital wikipedia article SpaceX Starshield is stuck in the review backlog purgatory. :/ CodemWiki (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, nothing I can do about it. – Hilst [talk] 23:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 24

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's never quite the last of it!

The Dictionary of Women Worldwide has an entry for 'Putli Bai (1929–1959)'. I was therefore going to create a redirect from 'Putli Bai' to Putlibai (dacoit), but then saw (1) that we already have Putlibai redirecting to Putlibai Gandhi, and (2) that recently you'd been carefully untangling some pages here and hadn't left a redirect when you did the page move. Where if anywhere do you think 'Putli Bai' should point? Dsp13 (talk) 15:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not again.......
@Dsp13: I'll be honest, I have absolutely no idea. Maybe create a WP:DAB at Putlibai and point Putli Bai to it? – Hilst [talk] 15:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. I'll do that. Thanks! Dsp13 (talk) 16:32, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheezburgr

No problem! – Hilst [talk] 16:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bluey RM close

Hi Hilst, did you intend to write consensus not to move (rather than no consensus) at Talk:Bluey (2018 TV series) § Requested move 26 February 2024? I'm a little surprised by that outcome. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 05:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. – Hilst [talk] 10:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Would you mind explaining your rationale? Hameltion (talk | contribs) 17:07, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found that there was a fairly straightforward consensus against the move, due to recentism and long-term significance issues. Weighing in the other RMs as well, it's very clear that there is no primary topic. – Hilst [talk] 17:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll accept that recentism concerns were not rebutted, but I disagree that long-term significance was well argued in opposes; as I noted in the discussion, they cited no evidence for that claim. (Having multiple RMs can also suggest that there is organic interest for the move.) Would you consider reopening the discussion or changing to no consensus? Hameltion (talk | contribs) 18:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think reopening is really worth it (like TheTechnician17 said, this has already been discussed three times in less than two years). No consensus is functionally the same thing as not moved imo, but I'll change it nonetheless. – Hilst [talk] 19:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add that I believe there was a clear consensus not to move. The original close was correct and should not have been changed to no consensus, as that just gives ammunition to yet another RM. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hilst [talk] 11:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

  • Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
  • Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
  • Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
  • Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
  • Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
  • Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
  • Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
  • Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
  • Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
  • Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
  • Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
  • Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
  • Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
  • Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
  • Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
  • Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
  • Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adelir Antônio de Carli

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Adelir Antônio de Carli 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 23:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adelir Antônio de Carli

The article Adelir Antônio de Carli you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Adelir Antônio de Carli for comments about the article, and Talk:Adelir Antônio de Carli/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of The Blue Rider -- The Blue Rider (talk) 22:24, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Football vs. sports

I spotted this edit; were you aware that "football" was recently made a valid GA topic? The GAR is sorted into the relevant GA topic on WP:GAN -- that's why it was set to "football". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: The talk page was in Category:Good articles without topic parameter. – Hilst [talk] 23:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks -- hadn't realized that that would be a side-effect. It's also caused a minor issue at {{Article history}}. I'll post at WT:GAN to see if anyone knows how to address the category issue. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Hilst/Archives,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Adelir Antônio de Carli

On 15 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Adelir Antônio de Carli, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Brazilian priest died while attempting to break the cluster-ballooning world record, in order to fund a spiritual rest-stop for truckers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adelir Antônio de Carli. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Adelir Antônio de Carli), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

PMC(talk) 00:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]