User talk:Zippy

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived to User_talk:Zippy/archive/1. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

User info boxes

Hey, how's it going? I've been meaning to ask you about something. On many user profile pages I've noticed lots of interesting user info boxes, and I was wondering where people get those and if there might be some sort of a big collection of those for users to pick and choose from. I was also thinking of having one that says "This user is a padawan animator." This sort of thing seems like lots of fun! Happy editing,--Padawan Animator (talk) 23:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I don't have a link handy, but the templates on Wikipedia are organized into a browsable hierarchy, so you can see the ones that people tend to use on their pages. I put them in some time ago, and have forgotten exactly how I found them. --Zippy (talk) 09:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Albert L. Becker

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Albert L. Becker, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Albert L. Becker. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 18:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, it's a stub-article, certainly. I've added some references to it, and will search for more. Becker was the commander of the sub during multiple notable wartime patrols (multiple battle stars) and is written up in several naval history publications. I think that, given some time, this stub article can be developed into a biography of a notable WWII military commander. --Zippy (talk) 18:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your kind note regarding my modest contribution to this article.—Roman Spinner (talk) 11:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

WI Maritime Museum

Heya. Couldn't help but notice you've got a bit of interest in the Cobia; I'm currently one of the tour guides there. I'll see what I can do about the log book for the sub. I don't believe we have it...but I'll try. On a related note, Captain Becker commanded the Cobia from commissioning through the entire war, all six patrols, not just the first 5. If you have any more questions, leave them here or on my Talk page and I'll see what I can do about answering them! ArrowQuivershaft (talk) 21:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I can definitely check into it. I don't know of the top of my head, other than some of the summaries we have in the quick answer manual. Also, I'm not sure if you're the person who added it to the article on the Cobia or not, but Gato-class submarines had a crew of 80 men, not 60. Crew of the Cobia was 72 enlisted and 8 officers. I'm looking for documentation to counter that in place on the article, because that's dead wrong according to the sub vets I have spoken with through the museum. (It seems that the Gato was originally designed for a crew of 60, but they ultimately staffed them with 80 men.)

Also, want to put this on one of our talk pages so we don't keep playing tag on each other's? I'm not using mine for anything else. ArrowQuivershaft (talk) 16:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:11-23gray.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:11-23gray.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Deletion?

Should this be deleted? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_SRS/Secret_Page --What does this button do? (talk) 04:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Chevrolet Impala Classification

FYI there is some (old) discussion on the Impala page regarding full versus mid size classification for it...looks like the discussion was never resolved and even with your edits Wikipedia still provides conflicting information about the same car. Might want to take a look and add your two cents Ayocee (talk) 05:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

External links

I have removed the internet discussion forum from Progressive bulbar palsy again. Please do not re-insert it. Instead, please read the information I posted on the Talk:Progressive bulbar palsy page about the guidelines for external links. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Referenceforbusiness.com and Georgia Tech Alumni

Hi, Disavian. I saw that you undid my edit of Georgia Tech Alumni. Let's talk about it on the talk page for the article, OK? --Zippy (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Finally got around to replying. Link: Talk:List of Georgia Institute of Technology alumni#referenceforbusiness.com reference revert. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 03:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Nick Savoy

Hi Zippy,

Not too long ago I created a page for "Nick Savoy", a notable member in the dating world, and it seems the page got deleted for no apparent reason by an administrator. The page conformed to the Wikipedia standards. Is there any way you could help with reviving the page?

Thanks in advance. Camera123456 (talk) 05:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Zippy! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1,069 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Carl Feynman - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

A question about rules of userboxes in Wiki

Hi dear adminstrator, I am a user in Persian Wiki and I have an on going discussion with a Persian adminstrator about the userboxes we can create or not in Wiki. The question is: Is making userboxes like: "This user supports independence of Tibet from China" or "This user supports independence of Azerbaijan from Iran" or "This user is against Hizbullah terorist group." illegal according to Wiki userbox rules or not? R these rules same in all Wikis or different from one Wiki to another? I'm waiting 4 ur answer a.s.a.p. Regards, Pournick (talk) 04:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. Honestly, I do not know the rules around userboxes on the Persian Wiki. I'm sorry that I can't tell you more. --Zippy (talk) 21:14, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Password

What is your password? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.135.165 (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

My password? It's the thing I type in order to sign in, but that's not important right now. --Zippy (talk) 21:16, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Waves

Good to see you Zippy, I think that gal came across a hibernating admin list or something. :P Cheers. --Wgfinley (talk) 05:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Release the Kraken! --Zippy (talk) 08:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

A request

I have a request, can you please delete everything I had worked here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:The_Proposal.jpg&action=history and here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Proposal_(film)&action=history. I am Corey.7.11.1992. I admit that I was doing rubbish and if you can delete I'll be very grateful. I asked another administrator to delete, and he replied that there was no need. I know that was no need but I really can't watch that. Please delete. That's what I worked, not someone else. How much can be difficult. Thanks in advance. Corey.7.11.1992 6:42, 23 July 2010.

Hi Corey. I looked at the page and saw nothing wrong with the content. If you want to delete what you've contributed, you can do so by editing the page and removing what you added. But when I looked at the page, it looked fine to me. If there is something more to this request that I am missing, please tell me. --Zippy (talk) 04:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Carl Feynman for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Carl Feynman, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Feynman until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Patrick Tufts

The article Patrick Tufts has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no sources, quick searches turn up nothing remotely close, too old for BLPPROD

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sailsbystars (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Thank you for the note. I've added some references and clarified one section. I've now removed the unreferenced tags. --Zippy (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Berkley Horse

The assertion about the Prince Regent doesn't seem to be correct and you were right to remove it. However, it was not that far out: several sources agree that he did visit a flagellation brothel but that the establishment was that of Mrs Collett, not Theresa Berkley. See, for example, the reference by Autumn Stanley (1995). Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

leonard peskett

To be honest i am a bit unclear over how much of the design work was really his. The general design seems to have been guided by a committee with input from the navy before arriving at a general design. Detailed finishing seems then to have been done by designers at the two yards which each built a slightly different ships, lusitania and mauretania, actually with significant differences which must have required entirely different plans. Other people designed the inrteriors. So I am a tad unhappy at giving him billing in the first sentence of the article.Sandpiper (talk) 19:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Peskett says in I believe the Titanic Inquiry that he was "ultimately responsible" for the Lusitania's design. My impression from the sources I've read (mostly the linked ones) is that he was the overall architect for the ships and had a significant role (in another ship design which IIRC the military didn't dictate, perhaps the Mauritania, Peskett said that he designed the ship to be suitable for a military application if needed, which indicates significant independence of action on his part). --Zippy (talk) 03:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

He is the person who gets named but you know how it is, these things get simplified. One of the issues on my checklist for the article is exactly what he did do. He was the company naval architect who drew up some sort of plans for an initial design, but this seems to have been entirely rewritten once the navy became involved. The original plans had three funnels, which implies a significantly different layout. Then, turbines were a late addition and the stern design was not finished until after building had started, because they were still deciding about propulsion. The turbines themselves were built by the main contractor, so did they simultaneously redesign the ship? I would guess there was a lot of coming and going about the propellors, which went up from 3 to 4. None of which says peskett wasnt making all the changes, but it is another of those things which is unclear. i was puzzled about the statements that design details were left to the yards. I dont undertsand how lusitania and mauretania ended up with Mauretania significantly bigger despite both being to Peskett's plans for a pair of ships. My first thought was that Swan Hunter deliberately made Mauretania bigger so that their ship would hold the world size, speed etc records instead of Lusitania. But if they made such major changes off their own bat, it doesnt sound as if Peskett had such huge input. Then again, I could imagine Cunard being happy to claim the world record with their new ship Lusitania, and then a few months later get the publicity all over again when mauretania came along. Maybe it is the way victorians thought, but the navy made ships in batches to the same designs (at least as regards all the major details), so why would Cunard create two different designs when ordering two ships at the same time to the same government specification for the same route? So there is a puzzle here somewhere. I think the reality must be that the two yards had major influence on the designs, and then there is the question of what input came from the navy and their model testing tank people. I suspect that the reality was you decided roughly what size ship you wanted and what layout, and then a shipyard would sort out the details. Obviously it did have the capability to do this, but where did the balance lie in this case? Sandpiper (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't be surprised if there were committees, push-back on designs, collaboration, and so on. I'm not sure where we could look to get this level of insight though - perhaps there were minutes taken at the design meetings? But were they published anywhere? --Zippy (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Zippy,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.9.115.210 (talk) 21:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy to help. I added my name to the list. --Zippy (talk) 22:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Signpost interview

You are at least as involved with WikiProject Connecticut as I am, so you should have received an invitation to the online interview at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews3... --Orlady (talk) 23:53, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Dr. Mario (HELP)

Hello. Two users, one who recently created an account and the other who is under IP, are constantly undoing constructive edits on the Dr. Mario article. Messages were left on the article's talk page as well as on users' talk pages for explanations of their edits, but no answers were provided. Since the edits are unconstructive and quite disruptive, not contributing to ameliorate the article in any way, I would ask to semi-protect the article, or do any other action to stop the users from constantly undoing modifications. Thank you. --MaxDawsonC (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The users in question are Willsnoogbaroots and the other one's IP address is 77.97.87.115. --MaxDawsonC (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The case is solved. Sorry for disturbing you. --MaxDawsonC (talk) 16:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Usurp request / proof

I am requesting a rename on Commons. My current Commons name is ZippyEN. Zippy (talk) 08:52, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 09:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll take a look. Zippy (talk) 22:17, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Zippy

Hi Zippy. Nice to meet you. :)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back

Welcome back, we need more admins these days. HighInBC 16:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back, I see you haven't really made many edits in a while, but now that you have reclaimed your admin bit, we really need help at WP:ADMINBACKLOG, hope you can help! — xaosflux ^Talk 17:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Andreas Cahling

Please quote reliable sources. Xx236 (talk) 07:20, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

yes, of course. I'm an editor since 2002. I'm limited by my phone's browser, but will do so when at a computer. --Zippy (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andreas Cahling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IFBB. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Zippy. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Smoking-car-logo.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Smoking-car-logo.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:15, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Zippy.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

appreciate the heads-up. thank you. --Zippy (talk) 23:33, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zippy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zippy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

---

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Misa Uehara

Hello, you created this in the very early days of Wikipedia (well done for editing for so long!) I was wondering if you can help with the sourcing - it's a blp but it's only source is imdb. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Zippy. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Zippy. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gordon Warner

The article Gordon Warner has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Snowycats (talk) 02:32, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

see talk page for evidence that the subject a) was an established kendo senses, and b) has passed away, suggesting that the criteria for deletion of bios of living persons does not apply. --Zippy (talk) 18:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Main Street (Buffalo)

I moved the information to minus the buildings to the buffalo transportation page. Please delete the Main Street page I made Piffner (talk) 23:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Piffner! I think that's a solid edit! --Zippy (talk) 19:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Zippy. Is there a reason you fully protected that page? There is no ongoing edit warring/ content dispute so I am surprised you would fully protect it CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 01:59, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message

Hi Zippy,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022

Hello Zippy,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder

This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

Hello Zippy,

New Page Review queue December 2022

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Proposed deletion of Tufts University

The article Tufts University has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional and poorly referenced to the extent that WP:TNT is the best option for the encyclopedia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Redundant user right

Hi Zippy, are you aware that you have got the new page reviewer right and the administrator right, which makes the NPR right redundant as it's included in the admin package. Thanks, Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 18:48, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of it. Is this redundancy ok (aside from being redundant) or does it cause problems? --Zippy (talk) 08:03, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I believe that it doesn't cause problems, as you hold the patrol right either way. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 20:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. And excellent username, Zb! --Zippy (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello Zippy,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

New pages patrol needs your help!

New pages awaiting review as of June 30th, 2023.

Hello Zippy,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Zippy,

New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Zippy:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2400 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Concerns regarding your use of admin tools

Hi Zippy, I am very concerned that you are unfamiliar with the modern expectations of administrators as relates to tool use, speaking from a practical perspective, but also, and perhaps more significantly, in terms of the policies relevant to the use of such tools. Looking at the your past admin actions, I find issues with many of them. Starting with the most recent and going back:

1. The block of 2409:4089:128e:f85c::c1:40b1 only prevented the IP from editing the Wikipedia: namespace; it didn't prevent the IP from inserting junk into articles.
2. The protection of Main Street (Buffalo) does not at all follow protection policy. On the talk page, you justified the protection on the grounds of "Given this article is redundant I have locked it for further edits, ...", which isn't a reason to protect articles, let alone fully protect them (for example, an edit war would be grounds). I also note that there was no protection summary, which should be given to explain the administrative action to other users.
3. These two deletions, [1][2], are valid deletions under policy, as these were redirects to a deleted page; however, there was no deletion summary, which is particularly critical here, as non-administrators cannot go into deleted revisions to try to ascertain what happened. I do note that the deletion of the original article appears correct.
4. The block of 2a02:c7f:203c:e900:25ee:8e86:e00f:475c is a week after the fact, and could not have at that point prevented further disruption.

While I have no doubt that these actions were all made in good faith, I am concerned that the seeming unfamiliarity with the administrative toolset and policies will lead to future improper use of admin tools. I am most curious to read your thoughts on the matter. I also want to note that should you no longer wish to be an administrator, you can resign at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. Maxim (talk) 19:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Maxim, thank you for your notes. Happy to see your suggestions for policy that you would recommend as useful for review, if you would care to share.

Not sure about your meaning of "many" actions Buffalo was a year and a half ago, but I appreciate the heads up.

Again, if you have some links that you think would be a good review, happy to see them.

Cheers --Zippy (talk) 01:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I looked back and Buffalo was part of a cleanup of a redirect / artifle refactoring where I opened up a discussion on the talk page. See Talk:Main Street (Buffalo)

I cleared the block shortly after setting it, but in terms of impact iirc it was low due as the block was on the redirect itself and not an article, and was relatively brief. --Zippy (talk) 02:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

A good starting point would to be familiarize yourself with the administrators' reading list. When you say you "cleared the block shortly", I am assuming that refers to the page protection, which was removed by another administrator seven months later. Even if it was removed truly shortly later, that misses that point the protection was inappropriate. We strive to have editing as open as possible and use various forms of page protection to limit disruption. full protection is a very strong measure, usually reserved in mainspace for content disputes. It is unclear what disruption such a protection prevented. Maxim (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder

This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Zippy,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

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

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

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

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

2023 Awards

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

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

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

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

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)