Archive 5 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 15

Contents

Comment from Teahouse

Hi Nick I am repharsing as you requested. I i.e. AMAN TUGNAWAT to create new Artificial Intelligence products inspired by the Google search engine. Which is the best AI in the world in my opinion. The reason for my last message not making sense is because I am trying to be cryptic here. AND THE THING IS YOU CAN'T EVEN VERIFY IF ITS AMAN TUGNAWAT talking you right now.

MangoX0XA (talk) 01:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

You're still not making much sense, I'm afraid, MangoX0XA. I really don't care if you are the person you said you were - you do sound rather too young and immature actually to be them, and your English is not as good as I would expect for a graduate in Robotics and AI from a New York University. But whether you're trying to be cryptic or otherwise, the advice and welcome I left for you still stands. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:42, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Patrol on Tashtego

Hi there. I saw you marked Tashtego as reviewed. I had come across the page earlier on NPP and restored the redirect. Most minor characters even in major literary works don't have their own pages. The particular reasoning for an exception in this case (categories) could apply to others as well. Asking you to reconsider the decision. Happy patrolling and Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Barkeep49 Thanks for contacting me. You'd be most welcome to unreview the page, or indeed to restore the redirect. My rationale for marking this old page as 'reviewed' was simply to reduce the backlog and to remove a 2010-dated page from the back of the NPP list. It wasn't to signal my approval of the redirect being removed. I did have my doubts about whether a separate page was actually necessary, but thought on this occasion I'd leave it up to other editors to work together on. So, I don't really have any decision I need to reconsider - feel free to edit the page as you deem most appropriate. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. Undoing someone else's review is a move that raises eyebrows so I only try to do it in cases of clear mistakes not this which is definitely more a judgement call. I will be marking it unreviewed (which you'll get a message about). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Also as someone who patrols at the "oldest" end of the feed you my be interested in a flow chart I've made about how I do it. If you have any recommendations or suggestions they'd be most welcome. Best, Barkeep49 (talk)
Thanks for the notification, Barkeep49 - I know what you mean about raised eyebrows on unpatrolling. To be honest, I don't often go down to the oldest end of the queue, but I've now added your workflow page to my list of useful pages, and will read through it. Thanks very much for that. If I'm honest, I'd have assumed that keeping the page reviewed would have been fine, even if the redirect were to be re-established. I'd welcome you putting me right if I've misunderstood something on that, especially if there's a perceived value in keeping an old redirect page unreviewed so that it comes up clearly at NPP if it's wrongly turned back into an article. (I'm feeling this issue might have helpfully identified a gap in my experience). Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 02:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I didn't actually restore the redirect - unless it's a cut and dry case (e.g. someone is trying to restore a page that has been decided on as redirect at AfD) I don't do two undo/rollbacks in a row. That promotes an edit war. Instead I've found in most situations another patroller will reach the same conclusion I did and restore the redirect. Hence my note here. Glad it seems like my workflow might be useful. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

A goat for you!

[[|left|150px]] I'm here to return the favor! :)

You are noot (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Aw, thanks, You are noot! Unfortunately not all the goat arrived in one piece. But I do appreciate the sentiment. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
And a potential paradigm shift for you...

Portals WikiProject update #014, 27 July 2018

Development of design continues, full speed ahead...

Excerpt slideshows are here!

Can you say "paradigm shift"?

Now, in addition to picture slideshows, we have slideshows that can display excerpts. Portals are not just for topic tasting anymore. Now they can be made useful for surveying Wikipedia's coverage of entire subjects. This gives a deeper meaning to their name. Hmmm. "Portals"... Doorways to knowledge.

Portal:Lithuania was redesigned using excerpt slideshows. Check it out.

For those of you who cannot wait to test out these new toys...

We have not one, but three excerpt slideshow components to pick from:

{{Transclude excerpts as random slideshow}}

For this one, you specify the page names where the excerpts are to be extracted from.

{{Transclude list item excerpts as random slideshow}}

This one accepts source pages from where the page names are gathered from list items. Then an excerpt from one of those pages is displayed. The selection of what is included in the slide show can be limited to a specific number from the collection (of the page names gathered), and that selection is renewed from scratch each time the page is purged.
For example, if you specify Template:World Heritage Sites in Spain as a source page, the slideshow will cycle through those sites. Now you don't have to type them in one-by-one. This greatly reduces portal creation time.

{{Transclude linked excerpts as random slideshow}}

Same as above, but gathers links instead of just linked list items.

Panoramic banners

{{Portal image banner}} displays a panoramic picture the width of the page, and adjusts its size, so it stays that way even if the user changes page view size. And it accepts multiple file names, so that the picture displayed randomizes between them each time the page is visited/purged.

Give resizing the page a try:

Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania.

You can now balance section boxes

Before:

Reptile types
Amphibian types

After:

Reptile types
Amphibian types

Notice how the box bottoms line up. That readjusts even if you click the slideshow buttons.

The template used for this is {{Flex columns}}.

By the way, when you include more than one box in a column, any left over whitespace in that column is divided between them.

Box-header colour

You may have noticed the new {{Box-header colour}} template used above. It lets you pick the color locally (right on the same page). Before, this was handled on a subpage somewhere.

Testing, testing

Now that we have lots of toys to play with for making cool portals...

Don't forget, that the majority of views of Wikipedia these days are from mobile devices. We need to make certain that portals display well on those. So, remember to check your work on portals in mobile view mode...

To see a portal in mobile view mode, insert a ".m" into a portal's url, after "en", like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Reptile

If you discover problems in a portal you can't fix, report them on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals/Design.

Until next time...

Have fun.    — The Transhumanist   00:44, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Question

I Have change Draft:Yu Qiuyu, can you move this draft to article about Yu Qiuyu? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.162.2.107 (talk) 11:31, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

About the goat

It was meant to be cookies but it changed into a goat because of a glitch. ^_^ You are noot (talk) 17:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

 
Hello, Nick Moyes. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.You are noot (talk) 17:32, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello You are noot. Sorry, I wont be able to pick up emails or reply here for a while. I'm out of country right now, with very limited internet access. Regards from Canada.Nick Moyes (talk) 22:30, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

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

Hello Nick Moyes, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

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

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

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

Tech News: 2018-31

14:05, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Portals tasks requests: presented in the newsletter below...

Portals WikiProject update #015, 31 July 2018

Now that we have lots of toys to play with, it's play time!

Here are some fun activities to use our new toys on...

Fun activity #1: put the improved panorama template to use

Would you like to travel around the world? Well, this may be the next best thing...

Here's another fun toy to play with: {{Portal image banner}}

To see what it looks like, check out the panoramas at the tops of the following portals:

The task: There are many geography portals that lack panoramas. Please add some. Please keep the file size down below 2 megabytes, and keep in mind that you may find quality banners at commons: at less than 200K (.2 megabytes). Good search terms to include with the place name are "banner", "cityscape", "skyline", "panorama", "landscape", etc.

Related task: There are also lots of geography portals that have panoramas used as gaudy banners (with print or icons splattered across them) or that display them in some random location on the page. In many cases, those pages would be improved by displaying the panorama as a clean picture at the top of the intro section, like on the examples above. This works best with banner-like panoramas. Please fix such pages when you come across them, if you believe it would improve the look of the page.

Taller images might be better suited displayed further down the page, or in the "Selected images" section.

Note that {{Portal image banner}} supports multiple images, and displays one at random upon the first visit, and each time the page is purged.

Fun activity #2: install "Selected images" sections

That is, image slideshows!

Over 200 have been installed so far. Just 1200 to go. (Be sure not to install them on portals with active maintainers, unless they want you to).

The title "Selected images" reflects the fact that not all images on Wikipedia are pictures, and encompasses maps, graphs, diagrams, sketches, paintings, pictures, and so on.

The toys we have to work with for this are:

{{Random slideshow}}

and

{{Transclude files as random slideshow}}

The task: Using one of the above templates directly on a portal's base page, replace static "Selected picture" sections, with a section like one of these:

Selected images
Selected images

The one on the left uses {{Random slideshow}} (which accepts file names), and the one on the right uses {{Transclude files as random slideshow}} (which accepts source pages from which the filenames are gathered).

The above section formatting is used on many of the pages you will come across, but not all. In those cases, use whatever section formatting matches the rest of the page.

Note that you may come across "Selected picture" sections done with {{Random portal component}} templates. That template call is the entire section. Replace it with a section that matches the other sections on the page, and put the new slideshow inside that.

For example, in Portal:California, this code:

{{Random portal component|max=21|seed=27|header=Selected picture|subpage=Selected picture}}

was replaced with this code:

{{/box-header|Selected images|noedit=yes}}
{{Transclude files as random slideshow
| {{PAGENAME}}
| Culture of {{PAGENAME}}
}}
{{Box-footer}}

And the new section blended right in with the formatting of the rest of the page. Note the use of the {{PAGENAME}} magic word. Plain article titles also work. Don't feel limited to one or two page names. But be sure to test each slideshow before installing the next one. (Or if you prefer, in batches - just don't leave them hanging). Report technical problems at the Portal design talk page.

Fun activity #3: upgrade "Selected article" sections

These sections, where unmaintained, have gone stale. That's because 1) the excerpts are static, having been manually copied and pasted, and 2) because they lack automatic addition of new entries.

They can be upgraded with:

{{Transclude random excerpt}}

or

{{Transclude list item excerpt}}

or

{{Transclude linked excerpt}}

All three of these will provide excerpts that won't go stale. The latter two can provide excerpt collections that won't go stale, by providing new entries over time. The key is to select source pages or source sections that are frequently updated, such as root article sections, mainstream lists, or navigation templates.

Where will this put us?

When the above tasks are completed for the entire collection of portals (except the ones with specific maintainers), we'll be more than half-way done with the portal system upgrade.

Keep up the great work.    — The Transhumanist   19:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

  Administrator changes

  Sro23
  KaisaLYmblanter

  Guideline and policy news

  • After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
  • Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

  Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-32

19:39, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Crimean ride 1675

Hello. I have read your explanation for deleted article in my page. Only source from many revolutions history of Kievan Rus' is story of past years. This does not mean that corrections referring to it should be deleted. I also took description from one source. However, this is supported by many facts - campaign shifts the fact that Islam Gerei was often thrown out of throne and that, after year (1676), Turkish sultan had conflict with Cossacks (Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks). The Shaolin Monk   20:04, 4 aug 2018 (UTC)

Peer review newsletter #1

Introduction

Hello to all! I do not intend to write a regular peer review newsletter but there does occasionally come a time when those interested in contributing to peer review should be contacted, and now is one. I've mailed this out to everyone on the peer review volunteers list, and some editors that have contributed to past discussions. Apologies if I've left you off or contacted you and you didn't want it. Next time there is a newsletter / mass message it will be opt in (here), I'll talk about this below - but first:

  • THANK YOU! I want to thank you for your contributions and for volunteering on the list to help out at peer review. Thank you!
  • Peer review is useful! It's good to have an active peer review process. This is often the way that we help new or developing editors understand our ways, and improve the quality of their editing - so it fills an important and necessary gap between the teahouse (kindly introduction to our Wikiways) and GA and FA reviews (specific standards uphelp according to a set of quality criteria). And we should try and improve this process where possible (automate, simplify) so it can be used and maintained easily.

Updates

It can get quite lonely tinkering with peer review...
With a bit of effort we can renovate the place to look like this!

Update #1: the peer review volunteers list is changing

The list is here in case you've forgotten: WP:PRV. Kadane has kindly offered to create a bot that will ping editors on the volunteers list with unanswered reviews in their chosen subject areas every so often. You can choose the time interval by changing the "contact" parameter. Options are "never", "monthly", "quarterly", "halfyearly", and "annually". For example:

  • {{PRV|JohnSmith|History of engineering|contact=monthly}} - if placed in the "History" section, JohnSmith will receive an automatic update every month about unanswered peer reviews relating to history.
  • {{PRV|JaneSmith|Mesopotamian geography, Norwegian fjords|contact=annually}} - if placed in the "Geography" section, JaneSmith will receive an automatic update every yearly about unanswered peer reviews in the geography area.

We can at this stage only use the broad peer review section titles to guide what reviews you'd like, but that's better than nothing! You can also set an interest in multiple separate subject areas that will be updated at different times.

Update #2: a (lean) WikiProject Peer review

I don't think we need a WikiProject with a giant bureaucracy nor all sorts of whiz-bang features. However over the last few years I've found there are times when it would have been useful to have a list of editors that would like to contribute to discussions about the peer review process (e.g. instructions, layout, automation, simplification etc.). Also, it can get kind of lonely on the talk page as I am (correct me if I'm wrong) the only regular contributor, with most editors moving on after 6 - 12 months.

So, I've decided to create "WikiProject Peer review". If you'd like to contribute to the WikiProject, or make yourself available for future newsletters or contact, please add yourself to the list of members.

Update #3: advertising

We plan to do some advertising of peer review, to let editors know about it and how to volunteer to help, at a couple of different venues (Signpost, Village pump, Teahouse etc.) - but have been waiting until we get this bot + WikiProject set up so we have a way to help interested editors make more enduring contributions. So consider yourself forewarned!

And... that's it!

I wish you all well on your Wikivoyages, Tom (LT) (talk) 00:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Your Note to Sylviagindick

You wrote: "As a retired museum curator, it's really great to see new articles being written about art and art history (and not the usual run of footballers, dull CEOs and minor companies that want to promote themselves here)." Yes. At least with the footballers we only have to verify whether they have played in a league that is considered fully professional. The minor companies are also easy: They are almost always good targets for G11. The dull CEOs are hard cases, because we have to determine whether the references are independent or just press releases and whether they meet general notability, which is not always a clear guideline. I also like to see articles on species (of insects or whatever), because if the species is properly documented, it is notable. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, Robert McClenon. As for species: me too. In fact, that's been my main interest as a naturalist (though this AFD discussion is currently vexing me.) I am generally more inclined to expend effort to encourage and help retain editors like Sylviagindick who work in these more obscure areas than those creating the general mass of notable encyclopaedic trivia. But, as you're here, could I ask you about the current situation regarding WP:AFC? I would be interested in gaining experience and helping out there, but heard changes are currently happening to the review process. Where are we with that, and would now be a good time to get involved, or would it be better to wait until changes to the review process have been implemented and bedded in? Maybe we're already past that point? Your views on this would be most welcome. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Since You Asked

Since you asked, here are my thoughts on Articles for Creation. First, there are several editors who either talk about how the review process is broken and should be replaced by something else or merged into WP:NPP, or who talk, sometimes grandiosely, about improving the review process. Most of the big-talkers are not reviewers and are engaged in the usual Wikipedia custom of selecting a group of volunteers to whom you do not belong and dumping on them. The AFC process does have a considerable amount of brokenness. There is a backlog of 2000 articles so that submissions may wait as long as two months for review. Also, most of the submissions are crud, such as the minor companies that want to promote themselves, and people who think that Wikipedia is Facebook. However, I have not seen a plausible way to reduce that backlog. We could discontinue AFC, and let the submitters become auto-confirmed and then go directly to article space, but that would put the burden on NPP and speedy deletion and AFD to get rid of the crud. We could simply let the submitters go into article space, but that would go against WP:ACPERM and would be worse than the backlog. There are many claims that some reviewers are arbitrary and have unreasonable standards. That is true of any volunteer process, but we try to ensure quality of reviews. I don't expect there to be any significant changes to the review process in the near future, because the talk about changes consists mostly of wind. It is as good a time as many to get involved in the process. However, I will caution you, as mentioned, that there are two problems. First, most of the submissions are crud, and many of the submitters are clueless. Second, there is a lot of empty talk and of dumping on the reviewers. If you want to help out anyway, you are welcome. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Hypericum punctatum article review

Thanks for the advice in your review of the Hypericum punctatum article. I've made the suggested changes and I'll try to keep the measurement advice in mind in the future as I tend to use many different units in one article. You suggested that I nominate the article for DYK and I'm willing to do any work involved but I'm quite unfamiliar with the DYK process. Thanks, Pagliaccious (talk) 15:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

@Pagliaccious: OK, thanks. I think cm (for plant height) and mm (for floral parts etc) together are fine. It was just the decimetre unit that worried me. re DYK. OK, so you probably already know that Did You Know...? puts brand new articles like yours on the Wikipedia Main Page, presenting an interesting 'hook' which attracts visitors in to these random articles. Editors have up to seven days to submit an article for 'Did You Know...? and these all have to meet certain criteria. It has to be long enough (yours is), new enough (your is), and, critically, every factual statement must be supported by a good reference - especially the 'hook' (that needs checking). By following the DYK instructions (which I did find unbelievably complex at first!) you end up creating a unique submission template for your article which, when ready, you then substitute into the DYK submissions list at the point corresponding to the date you first put the article into mainspace. You must do this within 7 days of the article going live. One editor often then comes along, reviews your submission and article, suggesting improvements to the article or sometimes even a better, more interesting 'hook' for readers to see. Once you've addressed any concerns (and this itself can take a while - but that doesn't matter so long as you submit it within 7 days), your DYK submission will eventually get approved by the reviewer and goes into a waiting list, often taking a few weeks to appear on the main page. Articles with good photos stand a good chance of being used - and there's a place on the template for you to add that image filename and even a different caption to that on the article. Once on the Main Page it's there for between 6 and 12 hours, often gathering a quite a few thousand hits whilst on view. It can be a bit of work the first time you wade through the DYK instructions.
The real instructions are all at Wikipedia:Did you know. But a simpler, clearer set of instructions are available here: User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.
Hope this helps - and good luck if you decide to go for it! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: Thanks for the advice. I think I'll go for my first DYK with this article. Pagliaccious (talk) 18:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Portals WikiProject update #016, 15 Aug 2018

Future portal tool

Discussions are underway on the design of a portal tool (user script) that will hopefully have features for modifying portals at the click of a menu item, to make editing them easier. It might do things like change the color for you, add to a selection, add a new section, move a section, and so on.

If you'd like to be involved and suggest features for the tool, please join us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals/Design#What would you want a portal tool to be able to do?.

Progress report: upgrade of portals

As new portal components are built by our Lua gurus, those components are being used to upgrade portals. Each component automates a section of a portal in a particular way.

The sections that are mostly upgraded so far are the Intro, and the Associated Wikimedia section.

The sections currently undergoing upgrade are: Selected image, Categories, and the Intro.

The Intro? Isn't that done already?

Yes, and no.

The upgrade of the excerpt in intros is mostly complete (there are about 70 non-standard portals that still need it).

Now we are doing another upgrade of intros in the form of adding a panoramic picture at the top of the intro, on portals for which such a picture is available on Commons:. Dozens of panoramas have been added so far, and they are really starting to affect the look of portals — the portals that have them look really good.

Regions are the most likely subjects to have panoramas, but a surprising number of other subjects have banner-shaped pictures too. Some examples of non-geographic portals that they have been added to are:

Speaking of pictures, several hundred Selected image sections have been upgraded to include image slideshows.

Progress report: design

The push for automation continues, with new components under continuous testing in the field. As problems are spotted, they are reported to our programmers, who have done a fantastic job of keeping up with bug reports and fixing the relevant Lua modules fast. I am highly impressed.

Construction time on new portals is now down to as little as a minute or less. Though not in general. If you are lucky enough to spot portals that fit the profile of the new tools (their strengths), then a portal can be complete almost as soon as it is created, with the added time it takes to find and add a panorama. Source page titles are not generally standardized, and so it source pages in many cases must be entered manually. Where source page titles follow a standard naming convention, portal creation for those subjects goes quickly.

So, we still have some hurdles, but the outlook on portals is very good. New features, and many improvements to features are on the horizon. I'll be sure to report them when they become available.

What will the portal of the future look like? That is up to you!

See you on the project's talk pages.

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   21:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Shipley Country Park

I talked to the author of Shipley Hall about moving the article to the namespace Shipley Country Park, but he didn't want that. I think the problem is that Shipley Hall is defunct and Shipley Country Park is alive. Obviously I still think that move is the best option, what do you think? Szzuk (talk) 12:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Szzuk. Thanks for discussing this, not only with me, but with the original author. I'm sure you recognise we can't have two articles on the same topic. I really think the lede in Shipley Hall covers the two names. And now we have a redirect which ensures users find it either way. I'd suggest you check whether there's anything from your new page that you could add to the main article. It would be quite OK to create and expand a new section on the modern Country Park within that article, too. Does this help? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
I've dropped a section about the country park into the hall article, I don't think the situation is ideal but it is ok, so I'm just leaving things be now, regards. Szzuk (talk) 13:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-34

16:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Ogden & Astor

Besides being dangerously close to being a case of WP:Bite the newbies WP:BITE, if you feel that there is "No evidence that a solitary bus [streetcar] stop is sufficiently notable to warrant its own page", then you need to prune Category:Muni Metro stations. Useddenim (talk) 11:35, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Useddenim: Thanks for stopping by to leave me your views on my new page patrolling and interaction with other editors. I see you left an identical comment for fellow reviewer, SounderBruce. Whilst I like a humourous page, just like the next editor, I'm honestly not sure what you're on about.
If you really think my redirect and edit summary of a new page about a single bus stop was uninformative and/or aggressive towards an editor with 3 months experience and 139 edits here, you will have to explain it better, I'm afraid. I'm always keen to encourage and assist 'newbies' as you call them (hence my work answering questions from newcomers at the Teahouse), but that doesn't extend to me retaining a non-notable page just to keep an editor happy. There was no intention to WP:BITE, nor do I think there was. We are building an encyclopaedia of notable things, here. If you don't like my WP:REDIRECT for the above article, or SounderBruce's WP:PROD for Burns Commons (The Hop), you - or they - are always welcome to go off and find reliable content and references yourself to justify reversion and/or retention. And we can then consider it. I certainly do not assess a solitary bus stop as notable, but maybe I missed a guideline somewhere (Please show it to me, and to Milwaukee 148, if you genuinely think it is liable to meet it). It may be that preparing future new articles in their user sandbox or as a 'Draft' at Articles for Creation is good advice, moving forward. But I really don't need you to tell me that I need to prune anything - we're all volunteers here. If you want to do that yourself, please go ahead. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:53, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for being unclear. I was questioning “Why this one article?”, not objecting to the deletion per se. Other than with Cleveland’s HealthLine (Adelbert Road, Cornell Road and a few “East nth Street” pages), there’s been no progress in eliminating these non-notable stubs. Useddenim (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
@Useddenim: Ah, OK. Well that's simple. This solitary new page came up at new page patrol where we either give the go-ahead for Google to index new articles, or mark them for some kind of action or possibly even deletion - in this case, redirection seeming the appropriate response. It's only occasionally I might take it upon myself to investigate the creations of an editor if I have concerns about them, and I certainly had no interest in the topic itself, so would never get involved in that. We have enough to do with a back log of 2000 new pages, and increasing! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Portals WikiProject update #017, 22 Aug 2018

This issue is about portal creation...

Creating new portals

Myself and others have been testing and experimenting with the new components in upgrading existing portals and in building new portals. They have now been applied in hundreds of portals.

The templates are ready for general use for portal creation.

They are still a bit buggy, but the only way we are going to work the rest of the bugs out is by using them and reporting the bugs as we come across them.

I look forward to seeing what new portals you create!

Be sure to report bugs at WT:WPPORTD.

The main portal creation template is {{box portal skeleton}}.

Portal creation tips

After starting a portal using {{box portal skeleton}}...

  1. Placing a panorama (banner picture) at the top of the intro section is a nice touch, and really makes a portal look good. {{box portal skeleton}} doesn't automatically insert panoramas. So, you will need to do that by hand. They can be found at Commons:. For some examples, check out Portal:Sharks, Portal:Cheese, and Portal:Florence
  2. The search term provided in the Did you know? and In the news sections is very basic and rarely matches anything. It is best to replace that term with multiple search arguments, if possible (separate each argument with a pipe character). For example, in Portal:Capital punishment, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Capital_punishment&diff=855255361&oldid=855137403 Searches in templates use Lua search notation.
  3. Check the In the news and Did you know? sections for mismatches. That is, sometimes entries come up that shouldn't be displayed. If there are any, refine the search strings further, so they don't return such results.
  4. Finish each portal you've created before creating a new one. We don't want unfinished portals sitting around.

Need a laugh?

Check out the Did you know? section on Portal:Determinism.    — The Transhumanist   02:22, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

West Park

I've tidied the refs but never added a google maps link. Szzuk (talk) 21:58, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@Szzuk: Unless youre using an Infobox (into which you can drop coordinates directly) it's actually just the same as adding any other url in External links. With a desktop with Chrome browser, there's a way of pulling off a shortcut link, though not, it seems, on a mobile. Otherwise you can zoom in to cover the relevant area, and then extract the full url from the browser. Take a look at external links at the bottom of Mont Blanc massif, where I've added Bing maps and OpenStreetMap links to the region. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:07, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
I had a go at adding the coords but it was too tricky, adding coords isn't an unpopular activity, a bot will come along to tag the infobox then someone who knows how to do it will follow soon after, so I will leave it to them now, regards, Szzuk (talk) 13:19, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
No worries, Szzuk. It's actually not too difficult once you have the right tool. Try https://www.latlong.net/lat-long-dms.html which allows you to click on the map and get coordinates. I always forget exactly how to enter them, so I look at another page to remind me - like that for Derby. Then I paste them in and edit them accordingly. Bingo! Then just click on the coordinates displayed, then click for a Google map to check they're correct. Bingo! Keep up the good work. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

September 2018 at Women in Red

September is an exciting new month for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons!



New: Women currently in academics Women + Law Geofocus: Hispanic countries

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

Check it out: Monthly achievement initiative

  • All creators of new biographies can keep track of their progress and earn virtual awards.
  • It can be used in conjunction with the above editathons or for any women's biography created in September.
  • Try it out when you create your first biography of the month.

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Improvements to Heok Hui Tan

Hi Nick,

Thank you for your comment on my Talk page. I have made some improvements to the article, including species authorizations. Regards, Mill 1 (talk) 07:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC) Regards, Mill 1 (talk) 07:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mill 1: Thanks. I've made a few small tweaks myself relating to his discovery and publication of two species new to science. I'm still not convinced he fully meets our WP:NACADEMIC criteria, but, on the basis that any scientist skilled enough to recognise a species totally new to science has made a 'significant discovery', per that guideline, I've removed the notability tag I added. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Jessica Rosemary Shepherd

Hi Nick, Thanks so much for your comment on my talk page about Jessica Rosemary Shepherd and for reviewing the page. I totally agree, I think I went overboard with citations simply because I found so many... but yes it makes sense to be a bit more economical. I've already cut it back a bit and will get it looking a bit less overflowing later today.Goblin Roger House (talk) 11:30, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Dear AWB'er

I noticed over at the Portals WikiProject that you have or use AWB (or JWB).

There are some tasks that have turned up that are perfect for AWB.

We have many new portals, and they need:

  1. To have a {{Portal}} template placed in the See also section on the corresponding root article, outline article, and index article.
  2. A {{Portal}} template placed on the corresponding category page.
  3. A link placed at the end (in the "bottom" section) on the corresponding navigation template. For an example, see Template:Birds.

The new portals can be found on Category:Single-page portals along with some revamped ones. You'll need to use the skip feature of AWB.

If you have any questions, please {{ping}} me, and ask them below.    — The Transhumanist   01:59, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

  Administrator changes

  None
  AsterionCrisco 1492KFKudpungLizRandykittySpartaz
  Optimist on the runVoice of Clam

  Interface administrator changes

  AmorymeltzerMr. StradivariusMusikAnimalMSGJTheDJXaosflux

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

  Technical news

  • Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
  • Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
  • Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

  Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:23, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-36

16:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Nick Moyes/Archive 11".