User talk:Dial911: Difference between revisions

Speedy deletion nomination of Institute of Innovation in Technology and Management

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Institute of Innovation in Technology and Management requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Daiyusha (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Daiyusha, you might wanna consider undoing your speedy. Dial911 (talk) 03:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah undid it already. Daiyusha (talk) 03:54, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:33:34, 3 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Musbaunow

• Musbaunow (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Adeniji Kazeem (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

my article for submission here Draft:Adeniji Kazeem has not been accepted. I have added links to online citation/refernces to the subjects, I am not sure why it has not been accepted, i need further assistance to get the article approved and i will appreciate.

Thank you.

Musbau

enownow 14:33, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Musbaunow, To create a stand-alone article about a living person, you need multiple reliable and secondary sources. See WP:BLP and WP:GNG. I only see this reference that talks about him in a little detail. Other than that you have only passing mentions of the subject. You can add more reliable references and then resubmit it for review. Dial911 (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Family Matters (novel by Rohinton Mistry) has been accepted

Family Matters (novel by Rohinton Mistry), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Dial911 (talk) 04:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 05:56:25, 6 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by WikiCpa

• WikiCpa (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Vijey Kumar Ghai (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello - Since you mentioned you were not able to access the books I referenced I scanned some relevant sections of the book-1965 Turning the Tide - How India won the war by Nitin A Gokhale. You can access it here on Dropbox - https://www.dropbox.com/s/oxvusfg72cfe0r5/1965TurningtheTide.pdf?dl=0. I have included the Preface just so you have some background and the relevant chapter that pertains to the subject Vijey Kumar Ghai (Chapter "The battle that changed the momentum - Morale booster in Kargil" - Pages 41-46 and Page 56-57 - referred to as Brigadier VK Ghai, Brigade commander, 121 Brigade.) This is the key to understanding the notability because it explains the significance of this battle (as evident from the Chapter title itself as "The battle that changed the momentum", and the decision of the Brigade commander to undertake the taking of Point 13620 peak etc. The author, Mr. Gokhale, is a veteran journalist of over 30 years, a defense researcher and Executive Editor of the Defence & Security Review http://www.dsalert.org/about-nitin-a-gokhale. The other book referenced is by Bajwa, K.S. The Nature of Military Leadership - The Dynamics of Soldiering. The following Page 126 brings reference to the second opinion of this decision by Ghai and I have included it to keep it to facts and bring impartiality to the article. As per Gokhales book Bajwa was the Commanding Officer of the 85 Light Regiment who took the orders from Brigadier VK Ghai that day. Here is the link - https://books.google.co.in/books?id=rwgEjeQ018sC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=Bajwa,+K.S.+The+Nature+of+Military+Leadership+-+The+Dynamics+of+Soldiering.&source=bl&ots=MIqlIVAh2U&sig=jtReWO0d7YgR9RubVExzx0KvpfI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwipw_OZv4rfAhVeAhAIHYS9BFgQ6AEwAHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=Bajwa%2C%20K.S.%20The%20Nature%20of%20Military%20Leadership%20-%20The%20Dynamics%20of%20Soldiering.&f=false.

The WW2 part of his service is more factual than notable - though I guess every soldier from WW2 is in some way notable! All 15 medals he received mentioned in the article are verifiable if you want that done. In the mean time I will trim the article and remove sections that you mention don’t have enough secondary references before resubmitting. Thanks. WikiCpa (talk) 05:56, 6 December 2018 (UTC)WikiCpa

WikiCpa (talk) 05:56, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Will go through as I have some time. Dial911 (talk) 16:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Dear Dial911- Seems you did not have a chance to check all the external sources that I referenced, that you said you would check above back in Dec 2018. In the mean time I have trimmed the article as you suggested. As mentioned the books and reports referenced are from the official published records of the Indian Army - Pls see Pages 48/49 of the "Official History 1965 War Archives , 1965" (PDF) reference in my article. About the proof of WW2 - I have written to the records offices in Britain and India and they have not responded as they do not have full records at this time and as I mentioned before I have the original medals in hand that can be verified if you wish by someone of authority in the Indian Army from his regiment. Would request you to kindly go through this again in the context of historical significance of the specific battles and the outcomes. Thanks.

WikiCpa (talk) 19:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)WikiCpa (talk)

Hey! WikiCpa, I am unable to contribute regularly on Wikipedia now a days. I suggest you approach for help here. Thanks! Dial911 (talk) 23:02, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks have done so after a few tries. The page says it is not active but have used the peer review page. If it does not work will try another source of help. Thank you for your time. WikiCpa (talk) 18:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Wikicpa

A page you started (Tecnia Institute of Advanced Studies) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Tecnia Institute of Advanced Studies.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thank you for your new article on Tecnia Institute of Advanced Studies.

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

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

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Delhi Institute of Heritage Research & Management) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Delhi Institute of Heritage Research & Management.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thank you for your new article on the Delhi Institute of Heritage Research & Management.

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

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

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 17:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Usha Narayanan (author) has been accepted

Usha Narayanan (author), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 02:11, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hi Dial911. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encylopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. N.J.A. | talk 13:03, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to New Page Patrol!

Welcome, Dial911 to the New Page Patrol team. Congratulations on receiving the New Page Patrol user permission and on becoming a part of the patroller community. Our mission is to accurately, rather than quickly, handle the new articles which are created. As you begin to patrol it's natural to have lots of questions. Feel free to ask on my talk page or ask for thoughts in the New Page Patroller IRC channel #wikimedia-npp connect or on our Discord server (invite link). We also regularly discuss issues and topics surrounding New Page Patrolling at the NPP discussion page and I would invite you to join us there. If you have any questions please feel free to ask me. I hope you find NPP as rewarding as I do and, again, welcome to the community. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 23:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Dial911,

Backlog

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

Coordinator

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

This month's refresher course

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

Deletion tags

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

Paid editing

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

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

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

Not English

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

Tools

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hello!

Hey James here, how are you? know I should not ask this but I've been working on draft:Plastiq recently and I was hoping you could review it. I would really appreciate your feedback. PD: its an article that has had a little polemic regarding its former editors and notability of the subject but I have discussed with other wikipedians and made pertinent changes to the tone to sound more neutral and to references to add importance. JamesRodir (talk) 16:45, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I just had a quick look at the draft & some references and think it might be accepted this time. However, I would not check it thoroughly as there are editors with equal or more experience than me who are checking, editing, commenting on it. Someone shall review and hopefully accept it this time. Patience is appreciated. Thanks! Dial911 (talk) 04:56, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I left messaged K.e.coffman in his talk page and he told me 'I do not plan to re-review the draft', Nosebagbear was just helping me in the help desk and SamHolt6 doesnt answer, I need another reviewer and I am a little tired of waiting but okay. Thanks. JamesRodir (talk) 19:25, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Reviewers aren't obliged to review your draft. We take up projects voluntarily and hence, I suggest you keep calm and just wait. Or if you like contributing to the encyclopedia feel free to create new articles and/or edit existing ones in good faith. Dial911 (talk) 05:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello Dial911,

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

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 844 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

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

This month's refresher course

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

Tools

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

Reviewer Feedback

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

Second set of eyes

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

Arbitration Committee

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

Community Wish list

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

---

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

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

Katupitiya Walauwa

Hello! Mr.Dial911 You messaged me before I did not seen it. So 1st I want to say I'm sorry about that. And this is a reason I message to you. Please Help Me. . I want to confirm this missing place to Wikipedia. So I included this Katupitiya Walauwa. So How To Confirm This Article? Can you help me? And Thank You And I have to include more details for this article. I will Do it soon. And Thank you.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wishmithak (talk • contribs) 07:49, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Wishmithak, I am not quite sure what you want from me. However, I can tell your article has been nominated for deletion here. As far as I can undertand, it would be deleted as it lacks any significant source. Articles on Wikipedia need significant coverage from notable and reputed sources. Feel free to look for more promonent sources and add it to your article. Dial911 (talk) 19:04, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Request on 19:12:37, 13 November 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Hoffmacs

• Hoffmacs (talk · contribs)
  • James Inglese (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:James Inglese (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I would like to get some clarity on a couple of matters surrounding the rejection of my draft page for Dr. James Inglese that was based on insufficient notability. As the co-founder of the NIH's NCGC center that became the NCATS center, he played an important role in the establishment of high throughput screening capabilities at the National Institutes of Health at a time when this methodology was almost exclusively the domain of pharmaceutical companies. I would have thought that this alone was sufficiently notable. However, I also understand that academics who are seen to be thought leaders are considered notable in the absence of the kind of media coverage needed in other disciplines. According to Pubmed, Dr. Inglese has published over 180 articles and according to Google Scholar these have been cited over 16000 times. His h-index of 63 is similar to that of many members of the National Academy of Sciences. On a related matter, I am trying to add some more evidence of his role as a thought leader in the field of high throughput screening, however I am not quite sure what to do after making edits to the draft. I do not see a way of "saving" my work without publishing it. I would like to work on it a bit before publishing (unless I am just misunderstanding what "publish" means in this case). Finally, I just want to clarify who I am and why I am working on this page. I have collaborated with Dr. Inglese and see him as a world leader in the area of small molecule screening, deserving of this recognition by Wikipedia. I am not one of these people who write pages for pay (I have gotten emails from these people and I find this practice to be somewhat repugnant). Thanks. Charlie Hoffman (Boston College Biology)

Hoffmacs (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Hoffmacs, Please feel free to add some more evidence of his role. It would stay here as a draft until approved, so you can publish the changes (and save your progress) as many time as you wish. Read WP:NSCHOLAR for details. Resubmit it for review and someone will take a look. Thanks! Dial911 (talk) 18:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Dial911,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

• There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
• A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
• A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
• A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi Dial911, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020

Hello Dial911,

Your help can make a difference

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

• A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
• Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
• A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
• Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Re review

Her movies has been released request to review articles once Vamb30 (talk) 01:42, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Hello Dial911,

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	DannyS712 bot III (talk)	67,552	Patrol Page Curation
2	Rosguill (talk)	63,821	Patrol Page Curation
3	John B123 (talk)	21,697	Patrol Page Curation
4	Onel5969 (talk)	19,879	Patrol Page Curation
5	JTtheOG (talk)	12,901	Patrol Page Curation
6	Mcampany (talk)	9,103	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	6,401	Patrol Page Curation
8	Mccapra (talk)	4,918	Patrol Page Curation
9	Hughesdarren (talk)	4,520	Patrol Page Curation
10	Utopes (talk)	3,958	Patrol Page Curation

Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

A big thank you and question

Hi Dial911, I wanted to say a really big thanks for your kind review of my proposed draft for AKQA. It was a struggle to find someone willing to review, so I am very grateful.

On that note, I hate to ask something else of you, but I wondered if you had a few minutes to look at my suggestion for the introduction? It's a brief summary of the article to replace the current long list of locations. I've also asked for a couple of adjustments to the infobox. As I am an employee of AKQA, I won't make any edits to the article myself. Thanks, GRedgrave from AKQA (talk) 11:58, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Let the list of services be as is for now. Mentioning every single thing that company does would make it sound like promotional. Let the essence be encyclopedic as Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, you see? Dial911 (talk) 21:13, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Jyoti Arora for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jyoti Arora is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jyoti Arora until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 13:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

What’s going on here

I see that you accepted this dubious article vis afc and I’d really want to know, why did you do that? Are you having trouble understanding our policy on notability or is there a backstory the collaborative project isn’t aware of? At this rate I don’t think I trust you to hold the Afc right. Celestina007 (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)