Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 06:51, 19 September 2020 (Archiving 2 discussions from User talk:Jake Brockman. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jake Brockman. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Carajou

Hi Jake,

I was reviewing Carajou's contributions and noticed that you reverted, and warned, which I think that was entirely constructive so thank you for that, this user last year for nominating an article page incorrectly as an "attack page". The user has been posting unhelpful and misleading information in AfD discussions that Scope creep and I had initiated recently and, in looking at his or her contributions, I'm not seeing a whole lot that's constructive. So, I thought I'd try and reach out to you and Scope creep to see on the feasbility of initiating a complaint process about this user?

Do you think his or her editing and discussions behaviour is disruptive enough to warrant a complaint? --Doug Mehus (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dmehus thanks for reaching out. I may be missing something, but do you have a diff where I interacted with the user? It may be too early in the morning, but I don't seem to find that revert. I'll need to look at this in more detail._pseudonym Jake Brockman 05:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Jake Brockman, Oops, looks like I had stumbled upon this page and saw you rightly reverted some edits, but I see now it wasn't from the above-named user. I think I got the user wrong. My bad. Doug Mehus (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you Jake for improving on the newly created page for Mumilaaq Qaqqaq https://en.wikipedia.org/User:EmilePersaud 06:03, 22 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmilePersaud (talk • contribs)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello Jake Brockman,

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 811 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 Misplaced Pages article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Misplaced Pages 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)

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 Misplaced Pages 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) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Daishawn Redan

You AfDed this a while back, I note this has been deleted then recreated. Do you think it should get a speedy or another AfD, or has his career progressed to a point he is now notable? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

@Piotrus: thanks for flagging this up. Back at the time of AFD he did no pass notability. He has since joined the first team of a Bundesliga team and has played. That will now lift him over the line for WP:NFOOTY. _pseudonym Jake Brockman 12:48, 5 December 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.

(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 Misplaced Pages: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 Jake Brockman,

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)

Thank-you Jake!!!=

Dcw2003 (talk) 16:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)Thanks Jake for making a redirect from Aby Belasco to Abey Belasco. You were absolutely right to do this and its what I was trying to do in the first place. I don't know what I did wrong; I was told I couldn't redirect from Aby Belasco to Abey Belasco, and then noted that the page, since it was blank would be deleted.

What was your process for taking a blank Aby Belasco page and adding a redirect to the completed page Abey Belasco? Please respond with a brief procedural write-up of the pull down functions you used.

Thanks again, your instincts were correct and you greatly enhanced the use of a page I did a great deal of work to complete. David Wassserman Dcw2003 (talk) 16:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)