• Show all user sub-pages

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29

This page has archives. Sections older than 291.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 50 sections are present.

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for always being so kind to users, both new and experienced. I especially appreciate all the work you do at the Teahouse. You clearly have the project and its contributors' best interests at heart. Thanks again for all you do and keep up the good work. SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for sticking with me and helping me throughout my wiki account history :) Jeriqui123 (talk) 14:39, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Jeriqui123. Despite what might have seemed like a 'no' to your question asked at the Teahouse today, don't be put off from sticking around there and seeing how people help one another. Once you have gained more practical experience of editing articles, and of solving some of the problems for yourself, I'm sure you'll be able to help out with answering the odd question - especially where you can speak from the experience of a brand new editor and empathise well with others who might be struggling. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Adoption

I'm thinking that I might want to become an adoptee given the amount of questions I ask and my plans to continue to edit on Wikipedia. I created my account in September 2018 (you were actually the first user to welcome me), so I've been around awhile. I've also made 518 edits (293 of which have been to mainspace). A lot of my edits have been adding short descriptions or fixing typos, but I'm quite proud of my edits to PC Optimum and Draft: Katherine Hughes (activist). @SkyGazer 512: has been incredibly helpful for a lot of my questions as well as the Teahouse when I've had them, but being an adoptee might be a better long-term route for me. I guess the other thing I should mention is that I'm also a female editor; one of the interests is contributing to Women in Red, but I'm also interested in other topics such as video games and topics related to Canada (since I'm Canadian). Clovermoss (talk) 02:58, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit: I fixed my ping to another editor. I also wanted to mention another one of my interests is translating French. Clovermoss (talk) 00:24, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Clovermoss, thanks for contacting me, and for the update. I am just drafting a reply to you in the affirmative. You'll get a notification from me when I post it, but I'll be doing so from another page, not this one. I thought it might be a good idea to keep related conversations about 'adoption' all in one place. You'll be able to find it at User talk:Nick Moyes/Adoption/Clovermoss in a few minutes. I won't be replying immediately to anything you might then add, because the UK is in UTC time, so I'm off to bed shortly as it's nearly 1 am here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:46, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I'll take a look at it. Just a heads up about time zone differences, ours aren't all that different. It's just past 8 p.m. where I live right now. I just have a bit of a tendency to have more free time in the evenings. Clovermoss (talk) 01:03, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Me too - nite, nite. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Windermere Boys

Thanks for finding some references for this. The Popular culture section of Windermere is the wrong place for it though, given that it is a real bit of history and not just a film or book. It would probably be better in the History section of Troutbeck Bridge, which is where they were moved to, if you wanted to move it across? --▲RedScrees (talk) 13:15, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi RedScrees. Yes, I tend to agree with you - not only the wrong section, but also the wrong article. I only enhanced the edit when I saw the entry at Recent Changes. I nearly deleted it as a poor attempt at vandalism, but decided to investigate and enhance it as I know and love the Lake District. I agree that a fuller entry in the Troutbeck page might be more appropriate, though I think very brief mention in Windermere might be appropriate. i.e. something along the lines of: "The lake gave its name to a group of boys... who settled at Troutbeck Bridge near Windermere in 1945". I would be very pleased if you would make those changes, rather than me. (rather busy at the moment) Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:01, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nick Moyes, I've made the suggested edits to both articles. They could still be improved so feel free to tweak them as necessary. --▲RedScrees (talk) 14:24, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk to us about talking

The Wikimedia Foundation is planning a global consultation about communication. The goal is to bring Wikimedians and wiki-minded people together to improve tools for communication.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis, whatever their experience, their skills or their devices.

We are looking for input from as many different parts of the Wikimedia community as possible. It will come from multiple projects, in multiple languages, and with multiple perspectives.

We are currently planning the consultation. We need your help.

We need volunteers to help talk to their communities or user groups.

You can help by hosting a discussion at your wiki. Here's what to do:

1. First, sign up your group here.
2. Next, create a page (or a section on a Village pump, or an e-mail thread – whatever is natural for your group) to collect information from other people in your group. This is not a vote or decision-making discussion: we are just collecting feedback.
3. Then ask people what they think about communication processes. We want to hear stories and other information about how people communicate with each other on and off wiki. Please consider asking these five questions:
   1. When you want to discuss a topic with your community, what tools work for you, and what problems block you?
   2. What about talk pages works for newcomers, and what blocks them?
   3. What do others struggle with in your community about talk pages?
   4. What do you wish you could do on talk pages, but can't due to the technical limitations?
   5. What are the important aspects of a "wiki discussion"?
4. Finally, please go to Talk pages consultation 2019 on Mediawiki.org and report what you learned from your group. Please include links if the discussion is available to the public.

You can also help build the list of the many different ways people talk to each other.

Not all groups active on wikis or around wikis use the same way to discuss things: it can happen on wiki, on social networks, through external tools... Tell us how your group communicates.

You can read more about the overall process on mediawiki.org. If you have questions or ideas, you can leave feedback about the consultation process in the language you prefer.

Thank you! We're looking forward to talking with you.

Trizek (WMF) 15:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thank you so much for helping me be the best editor I can possibly be at the Teahouse. I had a troubled start in 2013 when I got blocked for vandalizing Wikipedia. When I requested unblock in 2017, my requests got declined because I have evaded by block. It was in 2019 when I finally convinced admins (including the blocking admin) that I could be trusted again and I proved them right. It is unfortunate that many blocked editors who seek unblock have their unblock requests declined. Some of them has their talk page access removed. I'm glad that never happened to me. Since I got unblocked, I have working very hard to become the best editor I could possibly be with the help of other editors, including you. You have helped me when I was at doubts about editing. I try to learn from my mistakes as much as I can. I hope you keep doing your best and look forward to helping me soon. You also do a wonderful job helping others at the Teahouse. I hope you have a wonderful day and happy editing! Mstrojny (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Mstrojny - that's very kind of you. It's really great to see you contributing positively. I hope everyone is treating you fairly? In a way, it's actually you who deserves the barnstar for being open and honest, and for turning things around. Looking forward to seeing you helping out in all sorts of places.

I don't know how old you were when you first caused trouble and got yourself blocked, but I'm going to guess fairly young? Anyway, because of that, I'm going to ping Thegooduser - a young lad with enormous enthusiasm for Wikipedia and potential here who has taken the brilliant initiative of putting together a brand new newsletter. It's produced by young editors and written for young editors, and is called The Wikiwizard. It struck me that he might be interested in inviting you to write a piece for a forthcoming edition of their newsletter about how you first got involved in bad faith editing, how you felt and how you dealt with being blocked and how you've now turned completely around to being a net positive contributor, or something along those lines. I don't want to embarrass either you or him (each is free to say no) but I am just going to play matchmaker for a moment and see if you'd be interested in working with one another. If so, hopefully he'll get in touch with you sometime. All the very best, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:18, 26 February 2019 (UTC)  

I'm happy to work with anyone who is willing to work with me. Mstrojny (talk) 00:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you Nick Moyes for your input and advice! KaiserJohn (talk) 13:00, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Jayscott warned

Jayscott has been warned about having more than one account User:Jayscott478 and as of today User:Jayscott253 and to use only one account going forward. I am in no way convinced that this person intends to be a useful editor versus being a Teahouse gadfly and a creator of incomplete draft articles about obscure "Loop" roads in Texas. Trying to be patient. David notMD (talk) 19:23, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

@David notMD: Yeah - me too. One mainspace edit and 50 Teahouse edits. Hadn't realised there were multiple accounts, thoguh. As an aside, I struggled to work out how the circular wikilinks back to the same article have been created - via {{Routelist row}} it seems. But at a quick glance I can't see how that template is creating these circular links to the redirect and thence back to List of state highway loops in Texas. An example would be the blue-linked Loop 21. It's really bugging me. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:37, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Arggh! I did not know how many Loops actually have real articles. People in Texas with too much time on their hands? David notMD (talk) 19:45, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

HJ Martin

Hello, Nick. I am a little confused by the note you added to the HJ Martin page. I don't have any sort of connection to the company (the people, geographically, the industry, etc). I originally created this page on a whim because a friend of the owner knew I was a wiki editor. I haven't seen or really had contact with that person shortly after I created this page. So any connection I have with this company is tenuous at best -- not a customer, not an employee, zero contact, etc.)

With your permission, I'd like to remove the note. The friend recently contacted me and basically said, "Hey, remember that page you created, it's missing the periods..." and then I spent a day revisiting the project. That's about it.

Thanks so much! I actually really do enjoy doing this and probably should do more as I am now REALLY rusty at it.

Laurie CdbgLaurie (talk) 20:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, CdbgLaurie, thanks for reaching out to me - it is appreciated. I'm really sorry but, no, you should not remove the COI notice from either article that you have worked on. Not only does your editing pattern suggest to me that you are here only to promote one or two closely related topics, but this recent post at the Teahouse clearly indicates to me that you have a Conflict of Interest in editing the HJ Martin and Son and Edward N. Martin articles. You state on your userpage that you are a professional writer, so not only are you obligated to declare any conflict of interest under our WP:COI guidelines, but also if you have received any remuneration for helping your 'friend' - please see WP:PAID for those requirements. Having a COI isn't a barrier to editing (I have declared some of my own COIs on my userpage), but openness and honesty is a requirement here. I invite you to address that. To be frank, I was half minded to put the page about HJ Martin and Son up for an WP:AFD discussion on the grounds of not meeting WP:NCORP, but you had done such a good job in adding so many insider sources that, right now, I can't be bothered to go through them all to assess notability. Maybe I'll do that later. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Nick. Thanks for your explanation. And you are correct in that my bio used to say that. To be honest, I completely forgot about it and if you look at the date, it's been sitting that way since I first completed it. I updated yesterday. But it is true, I don't have a conflict of interest in that I have never written for that company or its owner, written about it in any capacity for publication or compensation anywhere, etc. The whole thing initially came about as a fluke and I just kept updating it because it existed.

With the legit journalism industry employment opportunities rapidly disappearing and/or literally paying wages lower than a Starbucks barista, I don't really do much writing or get paid for it at all (many of the former publications I wrote for have gone out of business and my career is now a project here or there every few months, and I am self-employed in a completely different capacity now). This whole thing truly is a a favor for a friend, one that I used to work with briefly many years ago that I see maybe every few years when he passes through the city I live in. When we had worked together, I had mentioned that I was a wikieditor. That's it. No big coverup or conspiracy. I have no reason to be untruthful on an anonymous platform. I had viewed what I do here, albeit not that frequently, as something to use my underutilized skills/training as a writer.

But anyway, it's all a learning experience here for me and I appreciate you taking the time to explain all this. If I could ask you a question, do you recommend I should declare my essentially former career on my userpage?

Thanks so much.

Laurie CdbgLaurie (talk) 13:14, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@CdbgLaurie: Answering last question first, I'd say it's up to you. We don't require people to say what they did or who they worked for. If you feel it would help to keep things trasnsparent, then keep something in about it. I would, but others don't. The problem I have is that your explanation still doesn't appear to ring true through your editing history, which shows no past evidence of being a Wikipedia editor until you took up the creation of two closely related articles for, as you say, 'a friend', and presumably also uploaded this photo for them -or maybe of them- which you took. Now therein lies the problem; most editors would find it unusual that a friend totally unconnected with a company or person would ask you to write about them in such detail, and to the exclusion of all else over the years. So even if a friend did ask you to write about them or their company, that would still be appropriate to declare on your user page or, better still, on the articles' talk pages. It's nothing to be ashamed about, and only ensures transparency. Hope this helps ( I don't mean my tone to come over as unduly antagonistic - I'm just trying to give a neutral assessment of how I and other editors see things here.)Nick Moyes (talk) 14:02, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Abelmoschus Esculentus' User Scripts

Dear all. Recently, our community lost a dedicated user, Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk). Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of Abelmoschus Esculentus' scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.

If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Brenva Glacier

On 4 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brenva Glacier, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when a massive rockfall in 1920 covered part of the Brenva Glacier (pictured) it caused it to lengthen considerably, at a time when nearby glaciers were retreating? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brenva Glacier. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Brenva Glacier), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Administrator changes Evad37 There'sNoTime Alex Shih • Brian • Mushroom • Nakon • Oscarthecat • PeruvianLlama • Ragib • Reaper Eternal • Rossami • Tom Interface administrator changes Evad37 • Galobtter Ritchie333

CheckUser changes There'sNoTime Keegan • Ks0stm Oversight changes There'sNoTime Ks0stm • Sphilbrick

Guideline and policy news

• The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
• Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.

Technical news

• A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
  • paid-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
  • checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.

Huggle

Hi! I see that you are currently using Twinkle, that's great! But for a more faster, easier, and more effective way to remove and spot vandalism is with Huggle, with Huggle all the warnings are given out automatically and vandalism is removed with one push of a button on your keyboard, there's even more great features with Huggle! All you need is the rollback rights to use Huggle. I highly recommended it, it's fun and easy to use. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Thegooduser Nice to hear from you. How are you doing? I did actually get rollback rights a while back specifically to help me familiarise myself with Huggle, but I didn't get on with it at first, and haven't had the time or motivation to continue, so I've stuck with what I know at the moment. Maybe I'll have another bash at it later. I'm glad you're finding it useful, though. I'll have to get you to teach me later on if I get stuck; I'm never averse to learning new tricks! One of these days I must get back into using AWB - the Wikipedia equivalent of Photoshop. Far too many buttons - daren't press any of them! On a related note, I had a very interesting Skype call with a University of Minnesota researcher yesterday who was investigating editor opinions of ORES... ...not that I know much about that either! Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:33, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

I really need to get off wiki and study for my history and english test lol... But for Huggle, at first I did not even understand anything at all! It was very confusing at the start, but now it's really easy, I even wrote a quick start for Huggle's Instruction manual, I made it so it's very easy to understand, and for AWB, I don't even know how to install it! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:35, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

I literally only use the spacebar and the letters q and s for huggle, nothing else. --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Video tutorial "Referencing with VisualEditor" – newsletter issue 1

Need your help to review 2019 Bandipur forest fires Page

Dear Nick Moyes, Hope you are good :) As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wildfire I have created a Wikipedia article 2019 Bandipur forest fires, Need your help to review the same.
--Naveen N Kadalaveni —Preceding undated comment added 17:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, NaveenNkadalaveni. You did a good job with that one - well done. I've NPP-ed the article and have tidied it up a little. Be careful not to cut and paste content from newspapers. You only did it a little, and I've removed the worst bits for you. I was confused by one section saying that there had been no large mammal deaths because they had all moved into the core area of the Park, wheareas later you write that there was severe damage in the core area, and one of the references shows the antlers of a a dead antelope. - You might want to look into that conflict. Clearly, this is a develooping story, so I hope you will add sections to the article once more information becomes available on the ecological impact of the fires. Very sad to read about, indeed. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes, Thank you so much for your time and efforts for reviewing & for tweaking the article. Regarding causalities part, News articles reported like "There are no estimates yet of the number of casualties in the fire. Wildlife officials say that while bigger mammals like tigers and leopards may have fled the Bandipur Tiger Reserve and taken refuge in neighbouring areas, reptiles, which are slow-moving, would have borne the brunt." Link.
one of the references shows the antlers of a a dead antelope--> Some dead animals pics were widely shared across facebook & whatsapp, some news papers did the Facts Check and confirmed that, those photos were fake and those photos were part of California wild fire. Though some animals have been killed by this wildfire due to 2019 Bandipur forest fires, official confirmation has not given yet. I have expanded the article by removing conflict sentences and added some additional information based on the latest data available. Will definitely, update the article once this subject gets certain constant data. --Regards, Naveen N Kadalaveni (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@NaveenNkadalaveni: Brilliant! That's the kind of high quality editorial input I like to see. Thank you for checking out those statements. It's a really sad story, and yet another tale that reaffirms my belief that our species will never adequately protect the biodiversity of this planet whilst the pressures upon it continue to grow. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:45, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation

Hello

Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.

We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.

Trizek (WMF), 08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation - link update

The previous message about the talk pages consultation has a broken link.

The correct link has been misinterpreted by the MassMessage tool. Please use the following link: Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Trizek (WMF), 08:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Comment at WP:Teahouse#can't_read_media_description_page

Hi! I noticed that in your comment at that page, you suggested two commercial products by Google. In general, it would be better to suggest only free/libre/open-source software and services, or at least not advertise one specific company's products over others. Thanks! —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/their)｜😹｜✝️｜John 15:12｜☮️｜🍂｜T/C 12:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for that suggestion. Other responses are available. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:35, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard/Workshop/Issues/March 2019

(PLEASE NOTE: THIS ISSUE WILL BE MAILED MANUALLY DUE TO THE SHEER LACK OF SIZE OF THIS NEWSPAPER. PLEASE SUBSCRIBE HERE TO RECIEVE THE NEWSLETTER. THANK YOU FOR READING THIS NOTICE.)

Hello, Nick Moyes! Here is the March 2019 issue of TheWikiWizard.

• What's Hot! (Don't be tempted to click the button!)
• Articles (Tips and More!)
• Editor's Notes (How to spread the Sunshine, A Successful RFB .....)
• Activity Page (Fun Activities, this time with some trick questions)
• Ads (Ads)

Hope you like this month's issue! If you'd like to discuss this issue, please go to this issue's talk page. Happy Reading! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 01:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Nick Moyes,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

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

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar

	Teahouse Barnstar
	for this reply ColinFine (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, ColinFine, that's very kind of you. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:48, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hi. I just wanted to let you know that I haven't disappeared off the face of the Earth, I'm just busy. I'm still interested in adoption (and asking questions when I have them), but school has been much more of a time commitment recently. The polar vortex and cold weather earlier this year has kind of caused chaos when it comes to getting everything done that needs to be done within the same timeframe. Clovermoss (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Clovermoss. No problem. I fully understand - I'm pretty stressed out of my head with impending deadlnes, too. Nevertheless, I'm here and will do my best to support you as much as I can. We should always bear in mind that real world commitments are more important than online ones. Just remember to ping me if you should contact me off this page. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:11, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals update #030, 17 Mar 2019

Previous issue:

Single-page portals: 4,704

Total portals: 5,705

This issue:

Single-page portals: 4,562

Total portals: 5,578

DYK for Andy Nisbet

On 17 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Andy Nisbet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that mountaineer Andy Nisbet (pictured) created more than 1,000 new winter climbing routes in Scotland? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Andy Nisbet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Andy Nisbet), 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-12

19:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Your work at Teahouse is stellar. Don't let yourself convince yourself otherwise. John from Idegon (talk) 02:14, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Than you, John. But you give some mighty fine answers there, too! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:38, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Assistant Required

Dear Member I need some assistant I new to wiki and so far only made two edits, I was wondering what wiki position on information that in pop magazines from 80's as some information in these magazines of in even pop annuals are not found on the internet, I am I allowed to you these content or is wiki information just internet information based. for example I have 10 different bros articles including advertisements from record companies like HMV, Virgin megastore, Ourprice which clear state BROS WHEN WILL I BE FAMOUS WORLD WIDE SALES WERE 3 MILLION am I allowed to use the content as reference

I would appreciate some advice advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brosisboss (talk • contribs) 11:13, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Brosisboss. First off, we always post new messages at the bottom of talkpages - and certainly not at some random point in the middle, as you did! As you see, I've moved it down now.

You ask a good question, and the answer is 'probably, yes'. We are happy for you to cite a source which is only available in print, provided it's printed in a reliable source, and not, say, taken from a 'reader's letter' of opinion pieces. Both of our editing tools have a small selection of popular templates for you to cite books, websites, journals, and newspapers. To start with, just use the cite book template that's offered to you. However, we do have a special one for citing magazines which you can use if you're happy to try it. It's {{cite magazine}}. Remember to put old references into context. e.g.: By the end of 1982, Bros had sold 3 million copies(insert your ref), though by 2012 sales had reached 5 million.(insert second reference)" (Or put both references together at the end of the one sentence.

Hope this helps. Feel free to pop back or ask at the Teahouse if you want us to check anything, and please sign every talkpage post by typing four keyboard tilde characters right at the very end before you hit 'publish changes' (like this: ~~~~) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Video tutorial "Referencing with VisualEditor" – newsletter issue 2 short version

Most active member of the Teahouse

I noticed here that you are the most active member of the Teahouse for the last 50,000 revisions with 1,781 edits.
Here are some other editors in the top 10:

Hope this was fun to have pointed out. Mstrojny (talk) 11:35, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Actually, embarrassing for me (David notMD) as I am not formally a Teahouse advisor, and also, this relatively recent fascination has taken time from my more skill-set appropriate role in improving articles related to health, nutrition and dietary supplements. David notMD (talk) 11:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Ah interesting stuff. I think you should halve my count as I'm always coming back to fix my own spytso erm, typos! I don't think there is any real 'formal' advisor status -I'd certainly regard you, David notMD, as an extremely valuable host. Funnily enough, a few weeks back I was doing some preparatory work, prior to suggesting an update to the displayed, and very out-of-date, list of images at the top of the TH page, and I did consider posting a list of the latest article that each of the most active hosts had created - purely to help new editors see what we each get up to. But it's actually a crude method of competence, especially as some very experienced TH hosts haven't created any yet, or at least for many years. So I dropped that thought.  Nice work there, Mstrojny. The TH is certainly a time-sink, but I still find it a wonderful way to both share and learn new techniques - like PrimeHunter's tip on searching across two categories that was posted today. Regards, all. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:07, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

You are ranked number 158 on the most active Wikipedians at the help desk. See here. Mstrojny (talk) 17:12, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, but whilst considered against how many editors are active on Wikipedia, that might sound impressive, the reality is I've only actually ever made 37 edits there! (only click this link if you really need proof). I always tell my daughters that I am actually the 71st best father in the world because, well, I'm happy to be that high up on that list! Nick Moyes (talk) 17:32, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Precious

helping new users

Thank you for being so helpful at the Teahouse and other places by helping new users; for helping fight vandalism; for reviewing new pages; for creating well-written and interesting articles about geographical features like Brenva Glacier - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--SkyGazer 512 ^{My talk page} 14:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, SkyGazer 512 - thanks a million! I wasn't aware of the WP:Precious project which it looks like you guys have been reviving. I'm honoured, though maybe its the newer users who really deserve the encouragement that such a lovely award like this gives. (Do keep your eyes on TheGoodUser and Mstrojny - the former a majorly enthusiastic young editor with the promise of being one of our really great editors; the later a reformed vandal who, after living out their block, has taken on a wonderfully responsible approach to contributing here.) They both deserve it more than me! Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I only knew about the project after I was given the precious award myself. Imo, you definitely deserve this award, but it's true that constructive newer users may be the ones who need the encouragement. I've ran into Thegooduser several times; he definitely does a wonderful job vandalism-fighting. I've never heard of Mstrojny, but I think it's great when editors who have previously edited disruptively turn themselves around into constructive users.--SkyGazer 512 ^{My talk page} 23:15, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

England and the United Kingdom

I noticed that you took out my previous edits of England, the United Kingdom and reverted it back to just England.

I don't know why you did this, but England is part of the United Kingdom, and under legislation and documents, England is not known as a country  just on it's own, but as part of the United Kingdom, so I don't see why you see this as a problem. It is not vandalising the page. Vandalising is purposely ruining the page with false information and no valid citation. This was a very minor edit and I just find it   inefficient  that you took it so seriously. If you go around giving TW to a minor edit, then I'm going to have to take this up further because you can't just do this for every small detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:C823:9E00:4445:CD8E:2E22:4E51 (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. You're not being rude by simply asking. But kindly link to the articles or the IP address you were using at the time, so I can take a look and explain, justify or apologise, as appropriate. I help monitor Recent Changes made to hundreds of articles a day, and can't remember each one. I do remember reverting the additions you refer to as being unnecessary over-clarification of a major country. Certainly not vandalism (my apologies if I accidentally reverted them as such), rather than as 'good faith' but unnecessary additions, and not something I'd expect someone to start pedanticly adding to across the whole encyclopedia.

I do take your point about inefficiency. I don't mind if you want to waste your time inefficiently adding United Kingdom after England. My reverts were intended to support and guide you as to what's important and what's not. I'm sorry if you took it personally - that's not my intention. I try to encourage and support all editors to edit effectively here, and as far as I can remember, I didn't think yours were that useful. Good Faith they were; vandalism they most definitely were not. Regards from the UK. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:12, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

OK IP editor(s), so I've now moved from editing on a mobile to working on a laptop, which makes it far easier to search for and address your concerns. I have now found my two edits, and I stand by them. I reject your concerns completely, as I feel I acted appropriately, and had full respect for you as an IP editor. Your edits were, put simply, not necessary. However, on investigation, it seems likely that you may be editing under a combination of IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. If so, please stick to one type; doing otherwise is equivalent to sockpuppetry, which might lead to a block. I note that both my reverts clearly stated yours were 'good faith' edits which I was reverting. (see here and here). I note that an IPv4 editor (also you?) then reverted both of my reverts to the two articles without leaving any edit summary (see here and here). I have now reverted those, with a clear edit summary of why.

Look, this is all really trivial stuff - life is too short to get so wound up. Please don't make a big deal of it. I believe you were wrong to make the change, and I believe I was right to revert them. You, it appears, dont. I really am sorry if you feel aggrieved; you need to appreciate how we work here. I believe I am right to be concerned you might be intentionally changing from IPv4 to IPv6 addresses to your advantage. There's no point threatening me to "take this up further". Feel free. I'm not being belligerent. The place for you to do that is WP:ANI, and I will assist you in any concerns you may have over my editing, and be open to apologising if I have acted incorrectly. Until then, I will continue to edit in what I genuinely feel is the best interests of the user experience, and I am genuinely bothered that you have taken this so to heart. It seems so petty. I also recognise written replies never convey the nuances that a verbal reply might have done, and I'm sorry about that. The bottom line, as I see it, is that you should desist from changing "xxxx, England" to "xxxx, United Kingdom" and that you should expect to be reverted every time that you attempt to do that. I'm sorry if you disagree, but that, quite simply, is how I and, I suspect, most other editors would feel the same way.. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:39, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

If you are really that bothered by this, then delete my talk page. I used another IP address because my phone IP had problems editing the talk page. I am shocked at your second feedback. You went from being reasonable to being downright rude. Why do you think it's wrong to put United Kingdom, when that is what England is part of? If you go to other sources of where films were made, it wouldn't say England, it would say United Kingdom. So why is it any different to where a person's birthplace is? Sorry, but you're the one being petty over this. I've never seen such controversy. Other editors I've come across have always been more reasonable and have never told me to "desist" changing one thing to another. If you think that I'm the one being heated over this, well I think anyone would if they got a warning for no reason. I realise you need to give out warnings for constant editing that has no valid citaton, but this one was just adding in part of a nation status. I personally do not see anything wrong with that and I don't see why any other editors would either. You are not being fair about this at all. I apologise if you think the "I will take this up even further" was a threat, only because if you keep giving out TW warnings to everyone over very small details, for editing twice, then you have only caused problems for yourself. I don't want to get into a heated argument over this, but unless you apologise for what you said about the "I reject your concerns" the I can't forgive you.

If I now come over as a bit blunt to you, then I am sorry. But it might possibly be because I had to spend two hours investigating and responding to your concerns, yet found no cause for them. I didn't template you with any warning messages (which is what I assumed you were upset about originally). It was a polite, factual edit summary giving an explanation of my actions in reverting your edit which I felt - and still feel - was unnecessary. Maybe you are somehow confused by what TW in an edit summary means? If you're interpreting that as some sort of warning, you are quite simply mistaken. Twinkle is just the tool some editors use when managing edits. I really don't know what more there is left for me to say on the matter. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:46, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I apologise for also if I sounded angry when I first started the discussion, mainly also due to the misunderstanding of TW. I would also like to hear why you disagree with what I put. Like I said, I really don't see why that is considered wrong because it isn't. Why do you not want me to put United Kingdom next to England, or Scotland because that's what it is and internationally that's what we're known as? Could you please give a reason why, other than it's unnecessary? They may be separate entities in their own right, but they're still known as the UK. Also I don't think most editors would care if United Kingdom was added, so chances are they would leave it, so what makes you think it would be reverted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:C823:9E00:DC1F:856B:FFCB:49 (talk) 14:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

I take back what I said earlier on and stand by my original comment. You just appear to be really obnoxious. Your arrogance is appalling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:C823:9E00:FDC2:A510:E3AB:1F1E (talk) 23:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your considered assessment. Please see The pot calling the kettle black. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

New user help

Hello again, if you would care to help guide a new editor and explain referencing and more importantly COI, see User talk:MB#Confusion about edits. Or I could just give a basic answer and refer them to the Teahouse. MB 14:15, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

OK - I've taken a look. I think it best if I reply on their talk page rather than yours - I suspect they'll be less confused if I do it that way. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:12, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

{{Help me}}

Thanks for all the info.

Frankly, I wouldn't know where to begin to implement any changes.

I'm going to step away from the page.

There is no pay involved in edit.

Was simply adding a photo.

It appears all the bio info is simply work credits to be found on IMDB or Google.

Again, I'm going to leave the page alone at this time.

If someone more qualified can make sense of it , please do.

Thanks.

Gg12lloon (talk) 21:18, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

You've got a 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.

Levent Heitmeier (talk) 13:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Levent Heitmeier: Hi. I got your email, but don't think I need to reply by the same means as I don't see it as a sensitive matter that needs privacy. Do you wish me to reply with feedback to you here on my talk page? Or would you prefer me not to respond at all? I'm OK either way. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 21:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Give me feedback about it either on my talk page or yours. And one more thing. I don't understand that when i click on the sandbox to open it, it directs me to edit that page and when i can access the original content only when i edit it. This is some kind of fault. From a universal servant 2409:4063:2397:BE12:0:0:27F1:28A1 (talk) 03:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@Levent Heitmeier: OK. You won't have that problem if you use the normal sandbox link right at tbe top of every page when logged in. The 'template' you added is the issue. If I click it, it takes me to the edit window of my sandbox, not yours. So simply change it to {{My sandbox|Levent Heitmeier}} and it should be fine.

Now, wrt your draft, the most obvious issue is the lack of any lead to introduce the subject in one or two simple sentences. It doesn't yet resemble an acceptable encyclopaedic article. I was left floundering amongst the mass of quoted text. It is simply isn't ok for an article as it's not relevant enough, and just too long (not to mention a possible copyright breach. What you could do is select a key element and say something like: as part of a longer statement, John Smith said of Joe Bloggs: "he's a great man"(cite sources). I did find the long version in many online blogs, but couldn't quickly trace it to an original source. It would be quickly removed were you to try. Moving forward, try drafting the article without the quotation first, having found other reliable sources, then add just a small fragment back in afterwards. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 07:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks brother! I got what you are telling and thanks for the attempt to find an original source.

I have saw the articles of many famous personalities which are really great but in most cases, I can see many other famous guys who have as much achievement as the ones but their articles have so less content and meaning that newbies start to think that the former is greater than the latter which is not so. I judge peoples by their hard work and hugely condemn if they don't get equal respect in society. That's what the issue is with Wikipedia. For example - Singers like Eddie Vedder, Bruce Dickinson, Bruce Springsteen are as much great as Elvis Presley and Freddie Mercury in terms of singing but Wikipedia article states the latter ones as one of the greatest but fails to give any such respect to the former ones which is for me and millions unacceptable because when the newer generations will see the difference in their articles, they will assume that Springsteen is not as great as Presley and Eddie is not as great as Freddie which isn't so. I'm working exactly for this cause. But many of the powerful editors here remove these kinds of claims even if I give a suitable reference. Fan following seems to affect the meaning of every single article and it's disastrous. I can work for the cause but I can't solve the problem unless other great wikipedians support me. It may sound a bit funny but the problem can not be solved unless many of us come together to do a small revolution which will eradicate the over-use of power from the Wikipedia. I wanted to talk about it to Jimbo but I don't know how. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 08:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I overwrote your signature - we had an edit conflict and I was on a mobile at the time, so it was too fiddly to resolve, so I chose to leave your Ip address in and save my reply to you. Feel free to reinsert it. From my perspective I don't give a damn whether any group of people feel one individual be they musician or statesman is "greater" than any other. Neither you nor I should be here to champion the cause of someone with fewer lines on Wikipedia than someone else. That's bias, and not OK here, but you're fine to to add reliable content to under-developed articles. I guess you're saying you see a bias against certain people. The answer is to monitor those articles and to challenge the removal of statements or sources that are deemed unreliable. But one person's WP:RS isn't always the same as another, which is why we have WP:RSN where any concerns on sources can be thrashed out if your attempts to politely discuss any concerns with another editor reach stalemate. (See the thread two up from this one by an editor concerned about my own editing). Life's too short to worry whether my musical hero, Loudon Wainwright, has more or less content than someone else here. So long as they're both deemed notable, they both deserve pages on Wikipedia. It's then up to individual editors to help those pages grow as encyclopaedia entries, but not as fan pages. I was in support of a new page on Jungkook being created few months back, but I am alarmed at some of the cr*p that his fans think they can add to his and other articles relating to BTS. Our job as editors is to act fairly in all matters, and to minimise personal bias in all that we do. If that leaves us in a minority, then it makes that task even more important. (That said, I have little personal interest in working on articles about modern day people and minor here-today-gone-tomorrow celebrities or so-called sportsmen who joined a national team for one game and weren't ever heard of again.) My own focus tends to be on the sciences and geographical information - the kind of stuff that people actually need to know about or look up and find easily. But each to their own. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:57, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm. I know. 117.225.31.105 (talk) 09:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

You and Levent best buds?

Levent added a Recognition section to the Ryan Adams article which in my opinion is over-referenced tripe. I do not intend to delete any of it (I know NOTHING about Adams), but thought you would be amused by part of Levent's edit explanation "Every single statement is well cited from reliable sources and is also checked by Nick Moyes who gave a green signal to add this." David notMD (talk) 21:43, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

@David notMD: Ah, that'll be as a result of my god-like status finally being recognised (- if only by one person, thus far) About time, I say! I know nothing about Adams either - see post above for where my "green signal" came from. Likewise, I'm minded not to delete it, either, but it needs care not to overdo sections like these. Cheers. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

"ToMonitor"

why do you need "ToMonitor" me, what have i done wrongJJBullet (talk) 11:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@JJBullet: Do you think I'm stupid? I shall answer on your talk page in due course. In the meantime be advised that editing other users pages and subpages is taken very seriously. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

im sorry, i Did not knowingly edit your subpageJJBullet (😂 Talk) 20:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I find that hard to believe. CalOtter (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@CalOtter: I've worked out what's been going on. It's a worrying case of WP:CIR which I shall address on their talk page first, but may well take to WP:ANI if it's not resolved. Watch that space! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I just looked at his recent edits, and one of them had the edit summary of "Installing User:Nick Moyes/common.js (script-installer)". His edits that were adding things to your pages used the same summary as yours, which makes me wonder if one of your scripts does that. He could have believed that they were going to be added to his userpage, so this could actually just have been a mistake. CalOtter (talk) 21:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:It appears this is what was happening. When he installed your common.js, he installed User:קיפודנחש/pageCollector, which also had your configuration. Instead of adding those pages to a page in his userspace, they were added to your page. CalOtter (talk) 22:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@CalOtter: Yes, I knew that, thanks. Am just investigating their other activities and the odd mendacious statement. I think it's a case of a fairly bright kid who seeks recognition and lots of fancy hats, but doesn't know enough to drive a big car yet. Hope we can sort them out before they have a head on crash here. Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 22:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I am extremely sorry to everyone that has been offended by whats been going on, i have not meant to hurt anyone in the process JJBullet (😂 Talk) 09:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. However, I do see far too many apologies from you in the wake of all your activities here, and I don't want to see any more. Just so long as you read and digest the implications of the concerns I have left on your talk page you will be fine. But you have been running before you can walk, and Wikipedia is a serious place with 5.8 million articles that I don't want you messing with until you learn the basics of how to edit encyclopaedia articles (which is why we're all here). Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Im Probably going to stop editing on the wiki until i can get my personal issues sorted, can you block me from editing for 24 hours pleaseJJBullet (😂 Talk) 09:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@JJBullet: I cannot do that as I am not an administrator, nor is that the right way to proceed. Just unplug the computer and only use it for key tasks - that's the best way. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Ok ThanksJJBullet (😂 Talk) 09:48, 5 April 2019 (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. CalOtter (talk) 13:29, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@CalOtter: Thank you very much for your email. The information you provided was very interesting, and I will definitely monitor the situation from here on in. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Checking in

I just wanted to check in and see how you were doing. Are you feeling any better? Clovermoss (talk) 01:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: Oops - blooming heck - yes, better now and I got sidetracked. I'm really sorry about that. I'll take a look tomorrow evening and reply as soon as I can after that. (am off to bed right now I'm afraid). Nick Moyes (talk) 01:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, that's okay! Thanks for taking the time to reply. It's getting late for me too, I should probably start gettig ready to go to sleep soon as well. Besides, I got to talk to Oshwah about some other questions I had. He's been incredibly helpful. :) Clovermoss (talk) 01:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Great job helping JJBullet!. CalOtter (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you - that's very nice of you. I'm hopeful they'll get the message that we really do support good editors, even if they mess up, but that we block bad editors to stop them messing everything up. Thanks for alerting me to this. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:17, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm okay with waiting

I've asked a lot of questions at the adoption page recently. I'm just writing here because I am aware that it is a lot of questions and that I'm okay with waiting for answers. I've noticed that sometimes you answer all my questions in one big wall of text and if you don't always want to do that, I'm perfectly fine with recieving an answer or two and waiting for the others. I don't want to be overwhelming with all of my questions and I understand that you have a life and even other interests on Wikipedia. I've also noticed that your other adoptee has asked for your advice on his draft. I'm fine with waiting my turn if you want to take a look at that first. :) Clovermoss (talk) 18:02, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Message

You used the f word in gender bend

Hailyrulesamerica (talk) 23:23, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

That’s descrimanation against trans Hailyrulesamerica (talk) 23:24, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hailyrulesamerica: Hi there. Thanks for coming over to my talk page to discuss any concerns you have, but please take care to post messages at the bottom of an editor's talk page, not some random point midway along, please. That's really unhelpful. Errm, no, I haven't used any such word myself. As you saw in the level 3 warning I left on your userpage, I simply reverted your edits to gender bender which appeared to me to go against consensus on the article's talk page. Sorry if I misunderstood, but I didn't think I had. Please discuss it there, not here, as I was only monitoring vandalism, and you, I'm afraid, appear to be on a one-person campaign to censor articles, as you did at Fuck by blanking the entire article. That way lies doom, my friend. ...OK, slight exaggeration; blocking, anyway. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2019 (UTC)  

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you... Viki-BSU (talk) 05:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Kashmir Observer

I can wait for the approval and process

This is its page https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kashmir_Observer.jpg source epaper.kashmirobserver.net

here i am adding some of the references for the page

Sajjad Haider is the publisher and editor-in-chief of the Kashmir Observer.

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Kashmir_Observer.htm

REFERENCE LINKS

https://scroll.in/author/12581 https://www.exchange4media.com/industry-briefing-news/kashmir-observer-to-launch-business-supplement-47494.html https://rsf.org/en/news/discriminatory-use-official-advertising-kashmir https://indianexpress.com/article/india/kashmir-newspapers-publish-blank-front-pages-to-protest-govts-decision-to-stop-ads-to-two-dailies-5619019/ https://cpj.org/tags/kashmir-observer https://www.newslaundry.com/2016/07/11/kashmirunrest-the-difference-in-what-delhi-and-kashmiri-media-saw https://www.newslaundry.com/2018/06/19/kashmir-woke-up-to-blank-editorials-in-newspapers-today-in-memory-of-shujaatbukhari

Levent revealed as sock

I had my suspicions based on writing style and a lot of postings at Teahouse, but Levent H. recently posted a not-logged-in screed at Teahouse (deleted by another editor), revealing to be same person as previously blocked for sockpuppetry. David notMD (talk) 14:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that and also had concerns - though it sould be noted at this time that the IP and LH aren't necessarily the same person. I note the IP was swiftly blocked and good to see that an SPI will look into it further, though it could be a 'joe job' (a new phrase on me). I wonder what proportion of those posting at the Teahouse end up getting blocked? Could make an interesting study. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-15

Recent changes

• More wikis are now testing visual editor section editing for mobile users. You can read more.
• When you add an edit summary the VisualEditor will search your recent edit summaries in case you want to re-use one. This works in both the visual and wikitext modes on desktop. It also works on the mobile site.

Soft cell

Hi,

Please advise how I would add a citation or reference? There are various websites mainly reddit.com that have this text “ They were first spotted by David Oddie, boss of Wakefield based Ambergris Records in a Bradford club, who passed his enthusiasm onto Dead Good Records in Lincoln, famous for their Hicks From The Sticks compilation, who in turn approached Polygram, the newly formed amalgam of Polydor and Phonogram” Smithsonp (talk) 18:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Smithsonp: Unfortunately, Reddit is a user-generate website and is not an acceptable, reliable source, and many sites copy one another's content. A music magazine, book or website under proper editorial/journalistic control would be fine, however, but not blogs or personal websites/social media. See WP:RS to learn what we mean by 'reliable source', and see WP:REFBEGIN for how to add an inline citation. The bottom line is that if you can't support a statement that is liable to be challenged by providing a proper reference to a reliable source - simply leave it out. Google Books can sometimes be a good place to search for sources, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-16

23:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard - April 2019

Hello, Nick Moyes! Here is the April 2019 issue of TheWikiWizard.

• What's Hot! (Oshwah gets his own Wikiproject!)
• Articles (Wikipedia Hacks, Vandalism Detection Tricks)
• Editor's Notes (New design, new page main page coming soon!)
• Activity Page (Fun Activities, and answers to those trick questions...)
• Ads (Ads)

Hope you like this month's issue! If you'd like to discuss this issue, please go to this issue's talk page. Happy Reading! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse observations

I saw your comment earlier about interest in a study what % of users at the Teahouse are blocked. Here's what I found in a very small sample size of the threads at archive 900. In these threads:

• 8 editors who had asked a question had edited in the past month
• 16 editors who had asked questions had edited since the start of 2019 (some were more active than others, but none of these editors were blocked)
• 1 editor recieved a COI warning. They weren't blocked and haven't edited for awhile.
• 1 editor was blocked for sockpuppetry.
• 3 additional threads were started by editors who had previously asked questions at the Teahouse (limited to this specific archive)
• 5 experienced editors (which I defined as having accounts older than 6 months) asked questions

Some other interesting information:

• In total, 3 articles were created and passed AFC by 2 editors who had asked question(s) at the Teahouse.
• In total, 9 articles were created and failed AFC by 4 editors who had asked question(s) at the Teahouse.
• In total, 1 article that had failed AFC was resubmitted and passed by 1 editor who asked question(s) at the Teahouse.
• In total, 2 articles that had failed AFC were resubmitted and failed again by 2 editors who had asked question(s) at the Teahouse.

In addition, Denkiden asked questions at the Teahouse that were archived without an answer. I'm also worried that they might not be here to build an encloypedia, since they are here to "raise awareness of memes" according to their userpage. Clovermoss (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: Thank you very much for this, and for previous posts on our adoption page. I'm currently on holiday in Spain, and will endeavour to digest and reply asap over the next few days or so. (Ping me again if I don't!) Meanwhile, Cullen328 might be interested in your small sample analysis of Teahouse questions, as indeed might Thegooduser, too. Regards for now, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

As I said, it is a very small sample size. One archive out of 900 isn't really enough to make any generalizations or anything. If I'm bored, I might look at other archived threads and see how they compare to each other/if there are any signifigant trends. Also, I hope you enjoy your vacation! Clovermoss (talk) 21:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Jim might give you a link to a video of his, giving an interesting breakdown of Teahouse questions a couple of years back. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:54, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-17

Recent changes

• The advanced search function URL now shows which namespaces you search in. The namespace field is collapsed by default on the search page. You can also add new fields to the search interface through a hook.
• The wikis now look slightly different in the mobile web version.

Mary Trefusis

Hello, Thank you for your message; most of the articles I have created were done in the early years under another user name. It seems that the occasional article I create nowadays gets criticized, e.g, Diocese of Aude and Ninove Abbey which got reduced to drafts and were only revived later on.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 10:28, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Johnsoniensis: I can understand your frustration. But if you've returned after a long break away, you do have to realise that Wikipedia has grown up considerably now. I think there's less concern to get articles created, and more concern to ensure that content now being added meets our high standards of verifiability and reliable sources. Stuff that might once have been OK, probably isn't any more. I hope you can appreciate that's why you might be feeling criticised, when previously your weren't. What you've experienced isn't anything personal - just a reflection of the higher standards we've all set ourselves to work under. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Your explanation makes good sense but I shall probably not be creating any new articles in the future so some editors will need to do so. I have in fact not been away very much but I did change my user name a few years ago after operating as User:Felix Folio Secundus from 2008 and under the present name for a number of years. None of the articles to which I made major contributions has got any more than a B class for quality but it seems no-one else had tried to create them at the time.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Howdy

Hi Nick, how are you getting on?--JJB ☎ 10:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

also thanks for the help, everything is going smoothly now, im taking it slow,--JJB ☎ 14:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@JJBullet: I'm fine thanks - just back from a family holiday abroad. Lots of sun and not too much Wikipedia - who could ask for more? LOL! I'm glad you've slowed down and I am grateful to Dlohcierekim that they reached out to you. I hope that contact helped. Just remember - if you need any support, we're always available at the Teahouse or you can contact us individually on talk pages if you need advice, and aren't in a rush. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Glad you had a nice holiday! and yeah thanks for the support--JJB ☎ 08:42, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

nice

Rosey sanchez (talk) 12:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Rosey sanchez, cute kitten :O --JJB ☎ 14:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanky you, Rosey sanchez - kittens are always welcomed here in this household...so long as they've been neutered and wear a bell to warn off birdlife. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

May you join this month's editathons from WiR!

May 2019, Volume 5, Issue 5, Numbers 107, 108, 118, 119, 120, 121 Hello and welcome to the May events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: "May" women / Mayors / Environentalists Geofocus: CEE countries Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Just dropping by for thanking you for your replies at WP:Teahouse. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 09:44, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Masumrezarock100, that's most kind of you. It's great to see you helping others there, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 06:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-18

22:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

User:JJBullet

Hi Nick. I see you've been keeping an eye on JJBullet. I think his editing on Jnr.void is innocent if misguided. I note that both boys are attached to the same trust, Novalis, which appears to cater for "the education of children, young people and adults, including those with emotional and behavioural difficulties". I suspect that having set up his page he is helping out a fellow resident. That brings me to the main point, in the infoboxes for both of them are full names and email addresses. This worries me, particularly in light of the description of Novalis. Should they be redacted? Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you - that's good advice. You'll see I've just replied and await a reply, but am now away for a few hours. I'm happy to contact an admin later re revdel if you aren't able to. i.e. let me know if you do taken any action yourself, so as to avoid duplication of effort. In haste. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I saw his explanation and your reply after I'd written the above. I think it best to let you run with this for the sake of a few hours, JJBullet seems to relate to you and trust you, I'd just be a stranger upsetting things. If you need to be away for days rather than hours I'll step in, but otherwise let's keep it cool. Best regards, and thanks for your caring attitude to newbies, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:40, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

@Martin of Sheffield:I just saw your message, and thank you so much to both of you for helping me, if you want to help at all Martin then im more than happy, just because i relate to Nick a bit more doesnt mean i wont take on board what you are saying, best wishes, - JJBullet (Talk) 10:39, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Seeking Adoption

Hello, I found your listing on the adoption page and out of all the adopters, I was most interested in you. We share an interest in the sciences (particularly biology, it seems), and also to WP:WOMRED although that's something of a stretch goal. At the moment I have very little interest in administrative tasks and I am generally most interested in learning to be a more effective editor. NPP is also something I would love to work on in the future when I feel like I really have my editing skills together.

I feel like I should explain my contribs, as well. I have nearly 2,000 edits on paper, but that is a poor representation of what kind of work I have done and I feel like it overestimates me. My first major project on Wikipedia was to completely clear the backlog of over 800 unassessed articles at WP:Biology using Rater as noted on my userpage. If you have used Rater, you will know that it is super easy. I consider it valuable work and I learned some really useful skills from it, but they don't transfer as well to the work areas that I want to break into and unfortunately it sort of pads my edit count.

I am really interested in continuing this kind of work, though--maintaining projects via assessment, management of categories, (tasteful) tagging, and working through cleanup listing. At the same time, I have my own personal backlog of many articles I have come across during my assessment spree that need direct, dedicated work. I have become frustrated with my skills on multiple occasions, especially when I'm working with trickier aspects. Short-term goals would be learning more about formatting, infoboxes, useful templates/tags, and so on, while a good mid-term goal for me would be full proficiency in taking diverse articles (in my field) up to C quality, even from a stub. I'm not interested at this time in contributing to GA/FA-level articles--I feel that would be a waste of my time.

I went over your page on adoption and I want to assure you that I understand the basics of the concepts you listed. I can't say I have memorized them but I am aware of all those policies, I take them seriously, and I plan to review them regularly. In addition, I just completed WP:TWA last night. I left the badges on my page as proof but I'll be deleting them soon for cleanliness. I also glanced at how you made a separate page for User:Clovermoss, and should you decide to accept me I think that would be a good course of action for us as well.

Anyway, thank you for your time in reading this and your consideration. I hope you are not too busy because we seem to be a very good fit! Prometheus720 (talk) 00:18, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

It might take a while for Nick to get back to you since he's been on a vacation. I just thought I should let you know since I was pinged :) Clovermoss (talk) 01:55, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice! I appreciate it! Prometheus720 (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Prometheus720 thanks for coming over to my page to seek some support and guidance. Ironically, I was just thinking of temporarily removing my current offer for adoption as I'm finding I have very little spare time beyond my own faffing about on Wikipedia, let alone rapidly assisting others. That said, if I can help you, I certainly will. I agree with you that working to get an article to GA or FA level takes tremendous commitment and effort, and it's definitely not something to start off with. (I managed it with this article which I converted from a simple list, but burned myself out so that when it got to my FA submission, I took too long to resolve a couple of matters, and it was put on hold. Two years later I now need to find some mental space to sit down and take that final tiny step to get it reassessed, as I'm confident it's there. Lurking at Peer review might be better, but I actually think you might find that simply aiming to improve one or two stubs to Start class is probably the most rewarding for some selected topic you're interested in. I see you've not yet created anything new yourself (which is fine - don't get me wrong), but you could consider giving that a try. For example, there are a million red-linked species articles out there just ripe for creation, and I could guide you through that process if you wished to. I don't do a vast amount of repetitive maintenance tasks myself, despite these being immensely valuable. I have, however, found myself drawn towards some of the other administrative and support work here, and will probably put my name forward for consideration of being given admin rights later this year when I've a little more free and able. I can see that with c 2,200 edits, though less than 150 in mainspace, with no single article you've worked on in detail, you could learn a lot by focussing on just one subject and working to improve that over a period of time. I'm probably not the best person to advise you on some of the more gnomish tasks that you've done so far. In fact, you could probably teach me some of them...I've never tried Rater, for example.

So look, here's the deal. I can offer to support you in the way you've seen I've tried to help Clovermoss. I.e. a dedicated on which we ping one another, keeping everything in one place, though I can't promise to give quick replies most of the time. I have absolutely no issues with anyone going to the Teahouse or to WP:HD for immediate assistance. But I can probably address some of the more complex and general questions you might have on the less gnomish work around her, and guide/steer you through some of them, or you can call me to invite me to look through work you've been preparing. i.e. the kind of things that are bit too long to tease out with a Teahouse question. If I can help you get the confidence to work on writing good, well-referenced article content - even if it's only stub or start level - and to understand where you can find some of the key resources for yourself to do that, I think my job is done. So let me know what you think. It might be nice to know your biological interests and current academic level (I'm more plants than animals). It would also be helpful (but not essential) to have some idea of your age so I can appreciate where you are within the education system (pre University/first year/post grad? etc). Gender is nice to know, but neither are things you should reveal publicly here if you're not OK doing that. Not revealing that is fine, too. Anyway, I must shoot. Apologies for any typos in this reply. Let me know what you think. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2019 (UTC)  

Thanks for your reply! I don't so much feel that I need help with the gnomish work. I'm actually in the process of writing a guide for Rater right now, which I will be submitting to Evad37 when I'm finished--I'll be sure to ping you when I do. I would not be surprised if I am one of its heaviest users by the end of this year or even earlier. It is sadly very underutilized. Really the main gnomish stuff I want to get into is categories, citations, and cleanup tags. What I would really like is help getting into editing articles. To me, FA/GA status is an unreasonable standard for most of the nearly 6 million articles on enwiki. Some subjects truly cannot be discussed at that length, and even if they are it is questionable whether it's worth that much time. I see B-class as a more achievable standard--I rarely complain when I look something up as a reader and find a B article. I don't expect myself to be pushing articles beyond B-class probably ever, except perhaps a few B-class articles I have found that seem worth a GA review to me. Even those I would want to be out of my hands.

I'm a senior biology student, very eclectic. I have had less education in wildlife bio, plants, or computational biology, but I find those topics very interesting as well and I plan to educate myself. I think that I have a slight preference for "concept" articles over taxon articles, which is why I have worked mainly outside the purview of Wikiproject Tree of Life so far. I enjoy neighboring topics such as geology and organic chemistry. I am male, but one of my top priorities with Rater is to ensure that all female biography articles are properly included in the appropriate wikiproject (usually WPWS but sometimes others are more relevant). I am feeling a little overwhelmed right now with the sciences but eventually I would like to work with Women in Red as well. After I complete my degree I will be seeking certification to teach high school (or maybe middle school) and I would love to use Wikipedia as an educational tool in that far-flung future, especially with underrepresented students.

So to circle back, I have private lists of articles that I want to improve in various ways, some articles that need to be deleted/moved/merged/etc (which I REALLY need help understanding on a per-article basis), a few articles that I need to create, and a few articles that need further assessment for GA status. I don't desire to do that myself and I'd like some advice on how to proceed with it. All of those are things that are beyond teahouse status for me. I should emphasize that I am actually a very experienced writer and I am used to writing every single day. I don't have any "bottleneck" at that level--it is translating that experience into the very specific style of Wikipedia that is difficult. For example, I have come across articles that are so poorly written that I want to just rewrite the entire thing--but I have to at least attempt to retain some of the aspects of the page that have been contributed by other users. This is not my encyclopedia but OUR encyclopedia, and I'm not used to being constrained in that way. Eventually, once I have cleaned out many of the gnome backlogs and I am only doing maintenance, I hope to be able to focus more on directly working on articles, perhaps improving one per day or so. I don't mind waiting on your responses at all--I have at least a month of heavy work (more than that at a slower pace) that I already know how to do, and I'm learning to do new things every day. There are probably 2-3 pages in my list that need attention very soon, but other than those nothing is really time-sensitive. I'd love to have some feedback on a few pieces of work I have already done, as well, but in due time. I would love to have a page to discuss all of this on. I never expected rapid responses--I assumed something more along the lines of you getting back to me when you aren't busy, more of a sort of within two weeks-ish time frame on average. The other question is, are we considering this adoption or something less formal? Thanks! Prometheus720 (talk) 16:02, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

OK, Prometheus720, thank you for that background explanation and information about yourself. On the basis of what you've said, and notwithstanding that I've not had much of a chance to look through your contributions thus far, I would be happy to support you as best I can. We clearly have some interests in common, and the idea that you might go into teaching and spread the word about the careful use of Wikipedia in schools is a real positive. I don't personally regard Adoption here as a very formal process. (My approach would not be a very structured one) In fact, the Adopt-a-User project became moribund some years ago when WP:HD and WP:TH were created. These both give users much faster responses to quick questions, and really are far better suited to new users. About a year ago I did start to work on a plan to turn WP:AAU around by making it solely targeted at people like you and User:Clovermoss (i.e. clearly committed and keen to improve across a number of areas in the medium to long term), and definitely not for brand new editors. Just as in real life, adoption does involve a commitment on both sides, and I didn't want to spend my time helping some POV-pusher learn to create one pet article about their company or favourite musician, but who then promptly leaves the project, never to be seen again. I see it as offering longer term support and gentle encouragement to improve - and definitely not instant answers - as you see by the tardiness of my reply to you! It has been my lack of time this last year or so which stopped me committing to try to improve and revive the AAU scheme.

So, if you're OK with it, I'm very happy to support you in learning to create articles from scratch. Providing you can get to a Start class level with most things you work on, and perhaps the odd C-class, I'd be very pleased. Going any further is just a bonus, not a target. I would propose to create a subpage here on my user page. We'd keep all conversations on adoption-related matters to that sub-page's Talk page, and my current approach with Clovermoss is to order the various shortcut links to policies, guidelines and help-pages on the user subpage so we both have a quick overview of what we've covered.

Unfortunately, I discovered that despite every user sub-page having an associated Talk page, the normal means of WP:NOTIFICATIONS doesn't work on them. Thus, you would need to add that page to your Watchlist, and because I'm away from my PC so much, and don't want to be swamped with email notifications, I have currently inactivated my own Watchlist email notifications. Thus I'd need you to 'ping' me correctly if you want me to actually know you've written there. We can each inform the other if we no longer wish to cooperate in this way together. And that might be simply because we have covered the basics you need and you or I now feel you're OK to go off on your own; or one or other of us might run out of free time, or we simply end up hating each other!!! Who knows? It's courteous and reasonable then just to agree ending things. Should you wish to copy over all or any content from the pages we work on, you're absolutely free to do that. If you wish, you may add {{Adoptee|Nick Moyes}} to your user page, and I will probably do the same on mine and on my entry on the AAU project page.

Perhaps I can get you to kick off when you're ready by copy/pasting bits of the summary above about yourself over to an 'About me' post, and perhaps follow it up with a bullet pointed list of questions or just listing different elements of article creation or other editing matters you feel you're still a bit unsure of and would like to get support with. If you can put them in a rough priority order, I can then work through that to get us started. By the way, during the summer the UK here works in UTC 1 hour, so I suspect we'll not be active at the same time. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:04, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals update #031, 01 May 2019

Some news :)

It's been a while since we've actually talked with your vacation and all that, but I've been learning a lot of stuff on my own. Anyways, one of my drafts passed AFC and Katherine Hughes (activist) is now a live article! I've also done other stuff and picked up on a few things. Created a redirect (for Katherine Angelina Hughes), talked a bit on article talk pages (for example, Alexei Romanov, and I read and used some of WP:MOS (check out today's article for improvement for an example). I've been busy (and will remain so until the weekend) but I figured I should write an update of sorts. Clovermoss (talk) 02:07, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: Thank you. I did see you'd been busy and productive, which is really great. I also recognise I owe you some roplies to earlier questions, which I will get around to doing as soon as I can. You do absolutely the right hing by also posting at the Teahouse for immediate replies when you need them. I generally need access to quiet time and to a keyboard, rather than faff about on a tiny mobile screen at odd moments which I've been doing a lot of lately. (Daughter has been stealing my laptop for doing her exam revision, which doesn't make it easy) Also: thanks for your holding reply to another user re adoption, which I'm about to reply to. Did you know that Alexei Romanov is a WP:DAB page, and that you can display those links as orange if you go to Preferences>Gadgets>Appearance and tick the box marked Display links to disambiguation pages in orange? It's really helpful when checking for accidentally wrong linkages. TTFN, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:04, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Well, at least your daughter isn't procastinating :). I have a lot on my plate too, but at least my exams are still a few weeks away. I was hoping for more time this weekend for Wikipedia, but I still have a lot to do so I won't be around as much as I would like. As for the link, I forgot to check whether or not it was the right one. This sounds like an interesting suggestion to prevent that from happening in the future. Clovermoss (talk) 20:42, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry nick, i pressed the wrong button, complete accident - JJBullet (Talk) 10:36, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@JJBullet: No worries. If you ever want to test out leaving messages, including warnings for users, you may do so on this talk page, but it would probably help to post a message to forewarn me. You did the right thing by removing the notice and explaining that it was a mistake. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:56, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Thanks nick - JJBullet (Talk) 11:00, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, sorry for the Teahouse host sign-up, just to remind you, you said i could be a Host as long as i only answer questions that i know :) - JJBullet (Talk) 10:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@JJBullet: No worries. I love that you're keen - but I would like to see you actually editing content in this encyclopaedia, rather than 'hat collecting'. Since I made that comment that I was less bothered about you pretending to be qualified as a TH Host than I was about you pretending to be competent to adopt other editors under WP:AAU, we've come to realise how many people have formally signed up to be a Teahouse Host who are no longer active or simply haven't yet got the basic experience and familiarity we need to give confidence to new editors. So we're undertaking a bit of a 'spring clean'. It's nothing personal. Not being signed up as a TH Host doesn't preclude anyone monitoring questions and answering those they're able to. In fact, lurking at the TH is the second best way to learn more about editing. The best way is actually to contribute to improving articles. Do you need any support or ideas in that regard? Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:44, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, thanks nick, yes i still need help in improving articles as im not quite sure what to do still - JJBullet (Talk) 14:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

OK. So can you tell me what type of things do you like to focus on? Is there a subject area that interests you? Or are you fussy about correct spelling and grammar? Do you want to help keep Wikipedia free of vandalism, and want to keep watch on recent changes? Do you fancy digging out references to strengthen articles which have templates highlighting that citations are needed? Tell me what you'd like to focus your time here on, and I'll try and help you further. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, i want to help keep wikipedia free of vandilism & keep watch on recent changes :) - JJBullet (Talk) 09:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

vandalism* - JJBullet (Talk) 09:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Administrator changes HickoryOughtShirt?4 • RexxS Necrothesp Bratsche • Kyle Barbour • Kzollman • Madman Interface administrator changes Pharos

Bureaucrat changes Primefac CheckUser changes Reaper Eternal

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Technical news

• XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

• In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
• Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
• A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.

a barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		For your work in sorting out Pteroplax and working to resolve a conflict between two new well-intentioned users. Many helpers at Teahouse wouldn't have been so diligent in making sure neither new editor ended up deciding to quit editing. valereee (talk) 15:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The Barnstar of Diplomacy would be the more appropriate barnstar for this one. Interstellarity (talk) 18:20, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Ah - who cares? It's was a kind thought - thank you, Valereee. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:06, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Interstellarity, yeah, I was looking for "Barnstar of New-user Handholding and Encouragement" but that one strangely doesn't exist --valereee (talk) 11:25, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

TheWikiWizard - May 2019

Hello, Nick Moyes! Here is the May 2019 issue of TheWikiWizard.

• What's Hot! (battle of the hairs?)
• Articles (Deny Recognition, Wikipedia's Welcome Page!)
• The Wikipedian This month we interview an Ip editor!
• News about Wikipedia! (Wikipedia News and Events!)
• Editor's Notes (New Sections to Main Page!)
• Activity Page (Fun Activities, and answers to last time's questions...)
• Ads (Ads)

Hope you like this month's issue! If you'd like to discuss this issue, please go to this issue's talk page. Happy Reading! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 23:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Nick Moyes,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Mont Blanc / Goûter Route 2019 Permit system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goûter_Route#2019_Permit_system_experiment Can you please have a look at my contribution here? Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by GentleDjinn (talk • contribs) 15:26, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@GentleDjinn: Even without stopping to look at it in detail I can tell you immediately that what you've added is not acceptable for our encyclopaedia. It might be OK for a website promoting the Gouter Hut and associated dangers and updating access restrictions, but not here. It trays well into WP:TLDR territory. You should really cut that section down to around three or four sentences and get rid of the totally inappropriate red warning text, which goes against WP:MOS. If you used a photo of a warning notice, that'd be OK, but not in the way you've done it, I'm afraid. In addition, you've used far too many references to support each tiny point. Two or three at most are needed, and please use the Cite template tool in the editor to add full details of each reference. Please see Wikipedia:Bare URLs for the problem and WP:REFBEGIN for how to resolve it. I'm sure you can appreciate that including 'access date' would itself be very helpful for topical and potentially changing information. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:11, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

I will not consider it an insult if any able person succeeds in condensing it, but I was not aware of the existence of a Cite template tool.GentleDjinn (talk) 16:16, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@GentleDjinn: Sounds like you've done what happened to me. I had been manually adding references for about 6 months or so after I started editing here before I realise that each editing tool has a 'Cite' button in its menu bar. Click that and in Source Editor you have a drop-down box into which you can select a template (website, news, book, journal) then add relevant fields like article title, url, publication, author, date, access date etc and even a 'refname' for re-using the reference without retyping it all a second time. In WP:VE you can paste in a url and it will automatically attempt to extract the reference for you. You still need to edit it a bit as it often gets some fields wrong, but it's a great time saver. The only weakness is that you can't define your own refname. Give them a go and see how it improves the quality of your contributions! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Aha, interesting, also to polish up the sources mentioned in quite a lot of previous contributions. I will give it at try in due time. Thanks! GentleDjinn (talk) 16:49, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-21

13:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello

How have you been nick? I have recently not been very active on the wiki and for that i am sorry :) - JJBullet (Talk) 14:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

GCSE

Hey nick just catching up, i had my first maths GCSE today, how have you been? - JJBullet (Talk) 09:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Hope it went well, JJBullet

- my daughter also had her GCSE maths this morning and had geography this afternoon. It not an easy time for people of your age, is it? I'm busy doing major house renovation work right now. I will reply with some advice for you on helping to monitor recent changes and to correct any bad edits. But it may a few days until I can find some 'quality time' to sit down at a proper keyboard rather than this tiny iPhone screen. But I guess you need to be revising, not playing here, so I hope that's OK. Good luck with the rest of them. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Please don't rush to correct somebody's typos. I accidentally saved it in error. Rushing to tell me I had not signed it just created an edit conflict just causes delays in giving you the full response. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)